Ecological Characterization of Potential New Marine Protected Areas in Lebanon: Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos

Home , Aplysina, Apogon imberbis, Batroun, Berthellina, Berthellina citrina, Calcinus tubularis

Ecological characterization of potential new Marine protected areas in Lebanon: Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos

With the financial With the partnership of support of MedMPA Network Project Legal notice: The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Specially Protected Areas Regional Activity Centre (SPA/RAC) and UN Environment/Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) and those of the Lebanese Ministry of Environment concerning the legal status of any State, Territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of their frontiers or boundaries.

This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of SPA/RAC and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.

Copyright : All property rights of texts and content of different types of this publication belong to SPA/RAC. Reproduction of these texts and contents, in whole or in part, and in any form, is prohibited without prior written permission from SPA/RAC, except for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that the source is fully acknowledged.

© 2019 - United Nations Environment Programme Mediterranean Action Plan Specially Protected Areas Regional Activity Centre (SPA/RAC) Boulevard du Leader Yasser Arafat B.P. 337 1080 Tunis Cedex - Tunisia [email protected]

For bibliographic purposes, this document may be cited as: SPA/RAC–UN Environment/MAP, 2017. Ecological characterization of potential new Marine Protected Areas in Lebanon: Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos. By Ramos-Esplá, A.A., Bitar, G., Forcada, A., Valle, C., Ocaña, O., Sghaier, Y.R., Samaha, Z., Kheriji, A., & Limam A. Ed SPA/RAC. MedMPA Network Project, Tunis: 93 pages + annexes.

Layout : Zine el Abidine Mahjoub, www.zinetoon.com & Asma Kheriji, Associate Project Officer - MedMPA Network (SPA/RAC).

Cover photo credit: © SPA/RAC, Oscar Ocaña.

The present report has been prepared in the framework of the MedMPA Network project financed by the European Union.

For more information: www.unepmap.org www.spa-rac.org Ecological characterization of potential new Marine Protected Areas in Lebanon: Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos

MedMPA Network Project Study required and financed by: MedMPA Network Project

Specially Protected Areas Regional Activity Centre (SPA/RAC) Boulevard du Leader Yasser Arafat B.P. 337 1080 Tunis Cedex - Tunisia [email protected]

In charge of the study at SPA/RAC • Atef Limam, Project Officer - MedMPA Network • Yassine Ramzi Sghaier, marine biology expert • Asma Kheriji, Associate Project Officer - MedMPA Network

In charge of the study at the Ministry of Environment of Lebanon • Lara Samaha, Head of the Department of Ecosystems

In charge of the study at the Marine Research Centre of the National Council for Scientific Research in Lebanon • Milad Fakhri, Director. • Gaby Khalaf, researcher.

Scientist responsible for the study • Alfonso A. Ramos-Esplá, senior professor (benthic specialist), University of Alicante (Spain)

Other scientific participants in the assignment • Ghazi Bitar, benthic specialist, Lebanese University (Lebanon) • Ziad Samaha, Programme Manager - Marine and Coastal Zone Management, IUCN - ROWA • Aitor Forcada, fish specialist, University of Alicante (Spain) • Oscar Ocaña, benthic specialist, Maritime Museum of Ceuta (Spain) • Carlos Valle, fish specialist, University of Alicante (Spain)

2 © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS

3 Ministerial Foreword

تعتبر المناطق البحرية الساحلية من أكثر النظم البيئية إنتاجية في العالم. إال ان هذه النظم اإليكولوجية - في الوقت نفسه - تعاني بشكل متزايد من ضغط الزيادة السكانية المستمر. في العديد من األماكن، يتم استغالل هذه النظم اإليكولوجية الهامة بشكل مفرط وتلويثها وتدهورها. كما أن تدابير الحماية الحالية المتخذة ليست كافية لمعالجة هذه المشاكل الملحة والمتزايدة. ومن هنا، تظهر أهمية إنشاء محميات بحرية وتفعيل تنفيذ تدابير أفضل للحماية.

ًوانطالقا من إيمان الحكومة اللبنانية بأهمية اتخاذ قرارات فعالة لصون بيئتها البحرية، فقد وضعت وزارة البيئة ضمن أولوياتها إنشاء عدد من المحميات الطبيعية البحرية الوطنية، حيث تم في عام 2012 وضع استراتيجية وطنية للمحميات البحرية بهدف إنشاء شبكة من المحميات الطبيعية البحرية التي تساهم في ضمان صحة البيئة البحرية في لبنان.

وفي هذا اإلطار، فإن وزارة البيئة اللبنانية تقوم بالتنسيق مع مركز األنشطة اإلقليمية للمناطق المتمتعة بحماية خاصة )SPA/RAC( بتنفيذ أنشطة مشروع»نحو إنشاء شبكة محميات بحرية ممثلة إيكولوجيا ومدارة بكفاءة وفعالية في منطقة البحر المتوسط« الممول من االتحاد األوروبي والمعروف باسم )MedMPA Network Project(. ساهم المشروع في تطبيق عدد من أنشطة االستراتيجية الوطنية للمحميات البحرية في لبنان من خالل إجراء في العام 2016توصيف بيئي للمواقع البحرية ذات األولوية، وهي البترون وجبيل ومدفون. يساهم هذا التوصيف البيئي في دعم االسباب الموجبة إلنشاء في المستقبل محميات طبيعية بحرية في هذه المناطق.

Marine coastal areas are among the world’s most Accordingly, the Ministry of Environment (MoE) and productive ecosystems. At the same time, however, the Specially Protected Areas Regional Activity Centre coastal ecosystems are increasingly suffering under (SPA/RAC) are implementing the European Union the pressure of a constantly growing population. financially supported project “Towards an ecologically In many places, these important ecosystems are representative and efficiently managed network of being overexploited, polluted and degraded. Existing Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas (MedMPA conservation measures are not sufficient to address the Network Project)”. The project contributed to the increasingly urgent problems. It is therefore necessary implementation of the Marine Protected Areas Strategy to establish marine protected areas and to promote in Lebanon by carrying out in 2016 an ecological better conservation measures. characterization of marine sites of conservation interest, namely Batroun, Byblos and Medfoun. This The Lebanese Government understands the importance ecological characterization would serve to reinforce the of effective decision-making for its marine environment. rationale and justification for their future establishment Accordingly, the Ministry of Environment, within its as Marine Protected Areas. mandate to establish protected areas, has elaborated in 2012 a Marine Protected Areas Strategy with the aim of creating a network of marine protected areas that contributes to the health of Lebanon’s sea and marine environment.

Fadi Jreissati Minister of Environment

4 SPA/RAC Foreword

The Mediterranean is one of the richest biodiverse MPAs to Achieve Aichi Target 11 in the Mediterranean”. seas in the world, it is a jewel that must be preserved This roadmap aims at guiding and harmonizing the for the well-being of present and future generations. Mediterranean efforts towards achieving the Aichi The Mediterranean countries having recognised its Target 11 by 2020. It builds on the progress made value and the need to preserve this common space, so far in the Mediterranean to develop marine and they adopted the Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) coastal protected areas in view to ensure the long-term framework since 1975, and the Barcelona Convention conservation and sustainable use of the components of on 1976. the marine and coastal biodiversity. At a time when the loss of biodiversity is becoming a SPA/RAC is consequently involved in several pragmatic global issue under the mankind different activities, initiatives and focussed projects to preserve and exacerbated by climate change impacts, the importance sustainably manage marine and coastal biodiversity, and of marine protected areas (MPAs) for the conservation to improve the governance of the Mediterranean Sea in of marine and coastal biodiversity and its resilience partnership with national authorities and involving the is clearly established. On a Mediterranean level, since relevant regional actors with a longstanding experience 1995, the Parties to the Barcelona Convention have in this field. In this context, SPA/RAC and the Ministry committed to a collective approach and adopted ”The of Environment of the Government of Lebanon have Protocol concerning Specially Protected Areas and committed to work together and build on the National Biological Diversity (SPA/BD Protocol)” which constitutes MPA’s Strategy with the aim of creating a network of the overarching regional instrument for implementing marine protected areas. This fruitful collaboration, the 1992 United Nations Convention on Biological reinforced through the European Union financially Diversity (UNCBD) in relation with the conservation and supported project “Towards an ecologically representative sustainable management of the coastal and marine and efficiently managed network of Mediterranean Marine biodiversity. Protected Areas (MedMPA Network Project)” has led to carrying out an ecological characterization of marine Hence, being committed under the Convention on sites of conservation interest, namely Batroun, Byblos Biological Diversity (CBD) to achieve the Aichi Targets, and Medfoun towards declaring them as new MPAs in the Contracting Parties to the Barcelona Convention Lebanon, thus contributing to a healthy and productive requested SPA/RAC to prepare a “Roadmap for a Lebanese sea and marine environment. Comprehensive Coherent Network of Well-Managed

Khalil Attia SPA/RAC Director

5 Executive summary

The present study has been undertaken within the and the rhodophyta Hypoglossum hypoglossoides, framework of the MedMPA Network project, a regional Heterosiphonia crispella and Womerleyella setacea, (ii) project financially supported by the European Union, the calcareous sponge Borojevia cf. cerebrum, (iii) the with the purpose to contribute to achieving a connected, demosponge Poecilloscleridae sp; (iv) the Lessepsian ecologically representative, effectively managed and polychaeta Branchiomma bairdi; (v) the Lessepsian monitored network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) decapod Halimede tyche; (vi) the opithobranchia in the Mediterranean which ensures the long-term gastropod Spurilla cf. neapolitana, (vii) the Lessepsian conservation of key elements of the marine biodiversity bivalve Spondylus groschi, (viii) the Chordata, with the and gives significant support to the sustainable colonial ascidians of the family Didemnidae Didemnum development of the region. fulgens and Lissoclinum perforatum, and (ix) the gobid fish Gobius paganellus; In Lebanon, the project activities were outlined in close consultation with the Ministry of Environment (MoE) in - 33 fish species were observed, of 12 were non- order to implement the Marine Protected Areas Strategy, indigenous species. The mean number of species and whose overall objective is to develop an effective MPAs abundance were highest in the stations Batroun and network contributing to sustainable development by Medfoun, while the maximum biomass was observed in enhancing natural and cultural diversity. Hence, an Batroun due to the greater size of the population. On the ecological characterization of the coastal and marine other hand, the lowest value was observed in Byblos, environment of three areas, namely Batroun, Kfar Abida- with only a mean of 1 species in 125 m2, due to the Medfoun and Byblos, has been undertaken. Those three homogeneity of the sampled habitat (muddy sand); areas were already listed among the nine sites that could - In terms of taxa richness, Byblos presented the highest be declared as future marine protected areas according values of species (≈ 200 spp.), followed by Medfoun and to the above-mentioned MPAs Strategy in Lebanon. Kfar Abida (≈170-172); Batroun presented the lowest To overcome challenges and for smooth implementation value (160 spp.); of the project activities, especially the field ones, a - In terms of species with heritage value, Batroun multilateral collaboration has been set up between presented the highest value of (0.37), followed by the Ministry of Environment of Lebanon, SPA/RAC, the Medfoun (0.33) and Byblos (0.26); while Kfar Abida had University of Alicante and the Museo del Mar of Ceuta the lowest (0.21). However, Kfar Abida was not sampled in Spain, the Lebanese University, the Lebanese National for coralligenous deep bottoms (> 40m down); Centre for Marine Research (CNRS-L) and the IUCN Regional Office for West Asia (IUCN-ROWA). All technical - Although the littoral of the zones presented many uses partners worked together and formed a multidisciplinary and impacts (industry, littoral urbanization, different team to carry out the current study. fishing activities, sewage discard…), some areas remain little altered, like Kfar Abida and Medfoun. These areas The study has shown the main following results: are interesting for establishing protection measures - About three hundred twenty-nine taxa (320 at lower with low impact uses. level (family, genus, species) and 9 at higher level According to the assessment made over the study (class, order)), belonging to twenty-six higher taxa (taxa biodiversity, habitats, interesting species, fish (phyla, classes), were observed. The main group was populations, naturalness, etc.), it seems that two the Mollusca, with 62 taxa (18.8 %), followed by Pisces management areas could be established respectively, at (59 taxa, 17.9 %) and Porifera (57 taxa, 17.3 %). Worth (i) Batroun-Medfoun and (ii) Byblos, as follows: noting is the low representation of Echinodermata with only 9 taxa (2.7 %); - Batroun-Medfoun (together with Kfar Abida): Between Ras Selaata (in the north) and Ras Barbara. It presented - With regard to macroalgae, Rhodophyta were observed the highest values (0.84-0.75) with an interesting rocky with 39 taxa (11.8 %), followed by Chlorophyta (15 taxa, outcrop (40-50m down) with coralligenous, semi-dark 4.5 %). The Ochrophyta were lowly presentd with 8 taxa cave and dark cave communities off Batroun. The rocky (2.4 %); shore is irregular with wide littoral platforms and pools, - Concerning the exotic species, a total of 66 species and the cove near the CNRS centre harbors an interesting were recorded, from which 62 species are Lessepsian community of small blocks. Although there is high human and 4 species from Atlantic origin (Paraleucilla magna, pressure concentrated in the Batroun sector, this is not Oculina patagonica, Mnemiopsis leidyi and Percnon very strong (compared to Byblos), proof of this being the gibbesi), representing about the 20.2 % of the taxa high value of the conservation index (CI > 0.75); and observed; - Byblos: Between Ras Amchit (in the north) and Fidar - Thirteen new species were observed for the Lebanese (in the south). It presented the lowest CI value (0.64). marine biodiversity. They were represented by (i) However, it presented areas of interest, such as the the Macroalgae, especially with the presence of the extensive littoral platforms and the Fartouch area. chlorophyta Caulerpa taxifolia var. distichophylla, However, human pressure is very high.

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 9 2. REPORT OF THE ASSIGNMENT ...... 11 2.1. PROSPECTED AREAS ...... 11 2.2. CHRONOGRAM ...... 11 2.3 LOGISTICS ...... 12 2.4. STAFF ...... 13 3. MATERIAL AND METHODS ...... 15 3.1 STATIONS ...... 15 3.2 OBSERVATION AND MAPPING ...... 16 3.3 CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITATS AND SPECIES ...... 17 3.4 VISUAL FISH CENSUS ...... 18 3.5 HYDROLOGY ...... 19 3.6 PROCESSING THE SAMPLES AND DATA ...... 19 4. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 21 4.1 GEOMORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES ...... 21 4.2 TYPES OF SUBSTRATA ...... 22 4.3 HYDROLOGY ...... 25 5. MARINE BIODIVERSITY ...... 27 5.1. TAXA ...... 27 5.2. SPECIES WITH HERITAGE AND INTEREST VALUE ...... 28 5.3 NON-INDIGENOUS SPECIES (NIS) ...... 40 5.4 NEW RECORDS FOR LEBANESE BIODIVERSITY ...... 41 5.5 FISH ASSEMBLAGES ...... 44 6. BENTHIC BIONOMY AND HABITATS ...... 57 6.1 HARD SUBSTRATA ...... 57 6.2 SOFT SUBSTRATA ...... 65 6.3 BIONOMICAL MAPPING...... 67 7. EVALUATION OF THE ZONES ...... 73 7.1 TAXA BIODIVERSITY ...... 73 7.2 EVALUATION OF HABITATS ...... 73 7.3. INTERESTING SPECIES ...... 76 7.4. FISH BIOMASS OF SPECIES OF FISHING INTEREST ...... 76 7.5 EVALUATION OF USES/IMPACTS AND NATURALNESS ...... 77 7.6 EVALUATION OF ZONES ...... 78 8. MARINE PROTECTED AREAS, ZONING AND MANAGEMENT ...... 83 8.1 ZONING ...... 84 8.2 MANAGEMENT MEASURES ...... 86 8.3 SURFACE COVER OF MARINE PROTECTED/MANAGED AREAS ...... 87 9. REFFERENCES ...... 91 Annexes ...... 94

7 © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS 1. INTRODUCTION

The Barcelona Convention and its Protocol concerning • elaborate an updated inventory of the biodiversity Specially Protected Areas and Biological Diversity in the of species and habitats, mainly targeting species Mediterranean (SPA/BD Protocol) recommends giving with heritage value; highest priority to promoting the management of the • characterize the habitats, mainly those that are to marine areas that are to be protected and to identifying be protected, and define their conservation status. sites that contain fragile, threatened or rare habitats, in order to set up Marine Protected Areas to protect: Once collected, the information will serve to propose • representative types of coastal and marine action/management plans to be elaborated for the ecosystems, of a size that will guarantee their long- Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos areas. These plans will term viability and conserve their biodiversity; include protection measures (Marine Protected Areas, • habitats that are endangered within their natural natural monuments), suggestions for the rational area of distribution in the Mediterranean or that management of fisheries (units, periods, areas and have a reduced natural distribution area as a result depths, fishing methods, species), as well as awareness of regression or because the area is itself restricted; and education strategies for users of the marine and • habitats that are critical for the survival, reproduction coastal area. and restoration of threatened, endangered or endemic species of flora or fauna; The field survey was done in September-October- 2016 • sites of particular importance because of their with extensive exploration of the above-mentioned scientific, aesthetic, cultural or educational interest. areas. The present report brings together data from the field with a first ecological characterization of the areas, This is the context of this MedMPA Network Project, and recommendations for the possible development of financially supported by the European Union (EU), which these. aims inter alia, to protect important biodiversity at local, national, and Mediterranean levels and to promote Furthermore, we tried to collect as much information economic development based on the sustainable as possible on the marine fauna and flora of these management of marine and coastal natural resources. interesting parts of Lebanon’s coast, especially with regard to the exotic species that have successfully The Project activities in Lebanon were outlined in close established themeselves in the area, for the inventorying consultation with the Ministry of Environment (MoE) of the biodiversity of this very special part of the following coordination missions undertaken which led Mediterranean. to a field survey in Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos in 2016, with the following objectives: Also, we made a sequence of the specific nature of the associations and facies that are a feature of this • rapid valorization of the marine natural habitats sector to show how they differ from other parts of along the coast of the suggested areas (Enfeh, the Mediterranean. This obviously requires drawing Chekaa and Raoucheh), for better appraisal; attention to the absence of certain species and the • characterization of the ecology of threatened presence of others, especially on the Levantine coast, habitats with recommendations for possible due to either natural causes (such as higher temperature development. and salinity) or human-origin causes (the Levantine basin’s communication with the Red Sea via the Suez To supplement and enrich knowledge of this important Canal, the discharge into the sea of waste water and Mediterranean area, the Project focused on discovering solid waste). the distribution of the main marine habitats and setting up tools for monitoring the state of heritage Awareness of the particular forms of harm caused to species, enabling the effects of those protection and the coastal environment by human activities (industry, management strategies adopted to be appraised. Thus, fishing, sewers, human frequentation, etc.) could help the field work was organized in a way that would: reflection on how to protect and conserve those areas • explore the suggested areas (between 0 and 55 of interest and maintain them in a natural state. meters down), locating and generally mapping the habitats;

9 © SPA/RAC, Yassine Ramzi SGHAIER

10 2. REPORT OF THE ASSIGNMENT

The present document was prepared following the (Saida, Tyr, Nakoura). The prospected areas (Fig. 2.1.) schedule for implementation that signals the output of all lie around (from north to south): Batroun (between a draft synthetic report of ecological characterization 0 and 54 m down); Medfoun (between 0 and 50 m along with recommendations on the management down); and the Byblos area (0-40 m down), all in central outlines of the study areas, in the “Technical fiche Lebanon. of the assignment to be carried out in Lebanon in September-October 2016”. This report represents the synthetized information about the assignment carried 2.2 Chronogram out in Lebanon from 29 September to 5 October 2016 The assignment lasted eleven days (28 September to 08 on the littoral and sublittoral surveys (0-54m down) October 2016) as is shown in Table 2.1. The length of of Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos as potential future work was a 9- to 10-hour/day, from 6.30 to 7 a.m. (leaving Marine Protected Areas. The expected outputs of the the hotel) until 5 to 6 p.m. (returning to the hotel). The assignment were: assignment was a success, working every day at sea. • Rapid natural habitat assessment (phytobenthos, zoobenthos and fishes) along all the coastal and Wednesday 28/9/2016 marine parts of the concerned areas, for their better • Arrival of the Spanish team. assessment. • Inventorying of species (mainly, of heritage and Thursday 29/9/2016 fisheries interest), and mapping of benthic habitats. • Meeting to prepare the assignment (team with the • Ecological characterization, human impacts Lebanon CNRS team and IUCN representative) and previous evaluation of the zones, with • Preparation of the assignment (material, logistics, recommendations for the management outlines of time planning) the studied areas. • Tour of the coast of Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos

Friday 30/9/2016 2.1 Prospected areas • Meeting with Cana crew This mission completes the study of marine areas • Hydroplane: 4 transects (1 diver/transect) in the proposed for protection by the Lebanese Ministry of Batroun and Medfoun areas Environment (LME/IUCN, 2012), with the 2012 mission • Scuba diving plots: 4 dives (2 divers x 2 sites) in the (Enfeh, Ras Chekaa and Raoucheh) and 2013 mission Batroun area • Hydrological station off Batroun • Work progress meeting

Saturday 1/10/2016 • Hydroplane: 5 transects (1 diver/transect) in Byblos and Medfoun. • Scuba diving plots: 2 dives (2 divers x 1 sites) in Byblos. • Work progress meeting

Sunday 2/10/2016 • Scuba diving plots: 8 dives (2 divers x 4 sites) in Medfoun • Visual fish census: 4 dives (2 divers x 2 sites) in Medfoun • Work progress meeting

Monday 3/10/2016 • Scuba diving plots: 7 dives (1-2 divers x 4 sites) in Byblos • Visual fish census: 4 dives (2 divers x 2 sites) in Byblos • Hydrological station off Byblos Figure 2.1. Location of prospected areas. • Work progress meeting

11 Tuesday 4/10/2016 • Work progress meeting • Scuba diving plots: 4 dives (1-2 divers x 3 sites) in Thursday 6/10/2016 Batroun and Kfar Abida • Meeting at the end of the assignment • Visual fish census: 4 dives (2 divers x 2 sites) in Batroun and Kfar Abida • Exchange of data and visual material • ROV station off Batroun Friday 7/10/2016 • Hydrological station off Kfar Abida • Departure of a part of the Spanish team (Oscar, • Work progress meeting Carlos and Aitor) • Meeting of SPA/RAC, CNRS and University of Wednesday 5/10/2016 Alicante with the Head of the Department of • Scuba diving plots: 4 dives (1-2 divers x 3 sites) in Ecosystems (Ministry of Environment of Lebanon) Batroun and Kfar Abida to present the results of the assignment • Snorkelling: 1 dive (1 diver x 1 site) in Kfar Abida Saturday 8/10/2016 • Visual fish census: 4 dives (2 divers x 2 sites) in Batroun • Departure of the head of the Spanish team

Table 2.1. Distribution of activities/day during the assignment.

Activities/day 28 W 29 Th 30 F 01 Sa 02 Su 03 M 04 Tu 05 W 06 Th 07 F 08 Sa (IX-X 2016) Travel X X X

Work meeting X X

Batroun X X X

Medfoun X X

Byblos X X

Kfar Abida X X

Ministry meeting X

2.3 Logistics researchers moved to the diving site using the inflatable dinghy of the oceanographic vessel (Fig. 2.2a) and a The workplace was reached on board the Cana traditional fishing boat from Batroun port (Fig. 2.2b). oceanographic vessel (Fig. 2.2a). Once in the area, the

Figure 2.2. The boats used in the 2016 assignment. a. The Cana with its inflatable dinghy. b. the traditional fishing boat from Batroun.

12 2.4 Staff

Seven research divers took part in the assignment (Michel Youssef, Georges Nochal, Georges Touma and (Table 2.2.). For maximum efficiency of safety and time, Bchara Karkafi); Elie Tarek, research assistant, from the team was split up into two groups: coastal habitats CNRS; Ali Badredinne, student from the University of (0-20 m down) and deep water habitats (0-50 m down). Lebanon; and, the efficient help of the fisherman Toufik We must mention the excellent collaboration with the Assal with the fishing boat support. crew of the Lebanese CNRS oceanographic vessel Cana

Table 2.2. Affiliation and tasks of participants in the September-October 2016 assignment in Lebanon.

Name Affiliation Tasks

Ghazi Bitar Lebanese University Benthos, habitats

Yassine R. Sghaier SPA/RAC Benthos, habitats

Gaby Khalaf CNRS CNRS coordinator

Milad Fakhri CNRS Hydrology, ROV

Aitor Forcada University of Alicante Fish, cartography

Oscar L. Ocaña Museum Mer Ceuta Benthos, habitats

Alfonso A. Ramos University of Alicante Benthos, habitats

Carlos Valle University of Alicante Fish, cartography

Ziad Samaha IUCN Diving support

13 © SPA/RAC, Yassine Ramzi Sghaier 14 3. MATERIAL AND METHODS

The material and methods of observation used differ ii) 3 hydrological stations; and according to type of dive (hydroplane transects, plot iii) 1 ROV station. According to sector, the depths dives, visual fish census) and objective (mapping, were between 0 and 54 meters (Table 3.1). characterization of habitats, fish counts).

In order to accomplish the study with rational planning, All the stations were prospected by scuba diving, except and according to topographic and human pressure one station where snorkelling and pedestrian sampling features, the prospected areas (Batroun, Kfar Abida, were used. In total, 57 dives were made, 1 of these with Medfoun and Byblos) were divided into two zones snorkel, which represents about 44 hours of underwater separated by about 5 km (Fig. 3.1): work. • N) Batroun-Medfoun southern Selaata to Barbara Each researcher brought his own diving material, GPS (with Kfar Abida). and underwater cameras; bottles of 15 and 18 liters, • S) Byblos: Hay Al Arab to Fidar. sinkers and a hydroplane were provided by the CNRS. Also, the University of Alicante provided measuring tapes for the visual counting of fishes. 3.1 Stations There were thirty-one stations (See Annex I, Fig. 3.2): i) 26 diving stations (7 in Batroun, 4 in Kfar Abida, 7 in Medfoun and 8 in Byblos);

Figure 3.1. Studied areas: Batroun-Medfoun (north square); Figure 3.2. Distribution of the stations Byblos (south square) (image from Google Earth). in Batroun-Byblos by different methods.

15 Table 3.1. Research activities by site and depth range. Number of dives (in brackets).

Locality Batroun Kfar Abida Medfoun Byblos Total

Depth range (m) 0-50 m 0-23 m 0-53 m 0-54 m

Hydroplane transects 3 (3) - 3 (3) 3 (3) 9 (9)

Scuba diving plots 5 (7) 4 (8) 4 (8) 5 (8) 18 (31)

Visual fish census 3 (6) 1 (2) 2 (4) 2 (4) 8 (16)

Snorkelling - 1 (1) - - 1 (1)

Littoral - 1 - 1

CTD profiles 1 1 - 1 3

ROV 1 - - - 1

Total stations 13 (16) 8 (11) 9 (15) 11 (15) 41 (57)

3.2 Observation and mapping observations permitted the collection of information about the bathymetric range of the target species. Different observation methods were used during the It had a 100-metre rope and a 3-metre chain and 2016 mission in Lebanon. In addition to the hydroplane was pulled by the inflatable dinghy. Once the diver based transects, one of the main objectives of the was on the bottom, he recorded on a plastic plate assignment was to study the coralligenous community, his observations as to the habitats encountered; so other methods were used, such as the O/V Cana and took a transect record with a GoPro video- echosounder and the ROV ‘Prometeo’. camera located on his head. Aboard the inflatable dinghy, one person sailed the boat while two others a) Hydroplane: The seabed was mapped using noted the position (using GPS), depth (a hand-held a hydroplane (Fig. 3.3) that allowed extensive echo sounder), time check and the diver’s safety. exploration of the concerned area (Ramos- The GPS data were to be downloaded later on a Esplá, 1984). At the same time, these hydroplane computer.

Figure 3.3. Image captured during a hydroplane transect, using a GoPro.

16 b) Echo sounder: As we said, one of the objectives of depths, the GPS-plotter and the echo sounder EN- the 2016 mission was to observe and characterize 250 of the O/V Cana (Fig. 3.4) were used, localizing the coralligenous biocenosis (between 42 and 54 irregular rocky zones that allowed us to study this m down). In order to observe the seafloor at these community by diving.

a b

Figure 3.4. Bridge of the O/V ‘Cana’ with GPS-plotter (a) and echosounder (b) to locate the coralligenous © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS (rocky outcrops, between 45-55 m down).

c) Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV): For observations us to observe the depths between 50 and 100 m below 50 m down the remote operated vehicle down (Fig. 3.5b). In order to observe the bottoms (ROV) ‘Prometeo’ of the O/V ‘Cana’ was used (Fig. around rocky outcrops, the ROV was used in the 3.5a) equipped with a 150 m cable, which allowed sector of Batroun.

a b

3.3 Characterization of habitats To characterize the habitats, we followed Pérès & and species Picard (1964), Bellan-Santini et al. (1994) and the ‘Handbook for interpreting types of marine habitat for A direct, non-destructive and semiquantitative metho- the selection of sites to be included in the national dology was used, using one-off dives, taking underwater inventories of natural sites of conservation interest’ photographs and noting down depth, type of seabed, (UNEP/MAP-RAC/SPA, 1998, 2002). For the species, fauna and flora species on a plastic plate with polyes- only the fraction of the mega-organisms (ø > 10 mm) ter paper, and some species were photographed and/or was considered (visual observation); and three levels of sampled for taxonomical determination (Fig. 3.6). Each a semi-quantitative value were done: (3) very common; station was located using GPS. (2) common, (1) less common.

17 © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR

Figure 3.6. Observation, sampling and photography during the diving plots.

3.4 Visual fish census problem can only be solved using enclosed rotenone stations; however, biomass estimates obtained with this Fish visual census is an excellent method to assess method increase by less than 1% (Ackerman & Bellwood, and make best use of the protection/exploitation effect 2000). Although these taxa of can play an important (Bayle & Ramos, 1993). This non-destructive method by role in littoral processes, their contribution to total fish scuba diving (Fig. 3.7) was used for the characterization abundance and biomass is quite low. of ichthyofauna to assure that the fish community is not affected by sampling, and to avoid interference A total of seven stations along the studied area (Annex with subsequent evaluations of the reserve effect in the I) Batroun (Ba-6, Ba-7), Kfar Abida (K-1),.Medfoun (M- future if finally these areas are protected. For this reason, 4, M-5), and Byblos (By-5 and By-6). In each station fish assemblages were visually surveyed using SCUBA were conducted, between 4 and 16 underwater visual diving (Harmelin-Vivien & Harmelin, 1975). Abundances censuses. These censuses were recorded by a SCUBA and individual sizes (total length in classes of 2 cm) for diver within a 25 * 5 m transect. A total of 56 samples each species encountered were recorded. were conducted. Transects were carried out in different habitats and ranged between 9 and 54 meters depth The sampling procedure focused on the visually (Table 1). Each observation was assigned to one of nine observable fraction of the fish assemblage, whereby predetermined abundance classes proposed by Harmelin we ignored small-sized and/or cryptic fish species (1987), the limits of which coincide approximately with with strictly benthic habits (Gobiidae, Callyonimidae, the terms of a base 2 geometric series. Geometric means Bleniidae, Tripterygidae, Gobioesocidae, Syngnathidae, of each fish abundance class were used for calculations. Scorpaenidae, Pleuronectiformes...), which would have This procedure is quite precise after a training period required a separate distinct sampling protocol (Harmelin- (Bell et al.,1985). All censuses were done between 9 and Vivien et al.,1985). Visual censuses underestimate 15 h, and with optimal and similar seawater conditions the abundance of small and cryptic fish taxa and this of turbidity and swell.

Figure 3.7. Visual counting of fish per transect using a measuring tape.

18 3.5 Hydrology With regard to the bibliography, aside from the Mediterranean bibliography, some papers from To round off the information on the marine ecosystem, Lebanon were consulted: hydrological profiles (temperature, salinity) were made on • Flora and fauna: Bitar & Kouli-Bitar (2001). Bitar et al. board the oceanographic boat Cana using a TCD (Fig. 3.8). (2017). Three stations (see Annex I) were carried out off Batroun, Kfar Abida and Byblos, between 1 and 100 m down. • Porifera: Perez et al. (2004); Vacelet et al. (2007, 2008); Vacelet & Perez (2008). • Cnidaria: Zibrowius & Bitar (1997); Morri et al. (2009). • Polychaeta: Lakkis & Novel-Lakkis (2005); Aguado & San Martin (2007). • Crustacea: Young et al. (2003); Bariche & Trilles (2005); Castelló (2010). • Mollusca: Crocetta et al. (2013a, 2013b, 2014); Bitar (2014). • Bryozoa: Harmelin et al. (2007, 2009, 2011) • Brachiopoda : Logan et al. (2002). • Ophiuroidea: Stöhr et al. (2009) • Pisces : Harmelin-Vivien et al. (2005). © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS • Non indigenous species: Zibrowius & Bitar (2003), Figure 3.8. Launching the TCD Lakkis & Novel-Lakkis (2005), Bitar (2010); off the stern of the oceanographic boat Cana. Katsanevakis et al. (2011); Bitar et al. (2017). • Habitats: Bitar & Bitar-Kouali (1995a, 1995b), Bitar et al. (2007), Bitar (2010). 3.6 Processing the samples and data

a) Samples: Some specimens, about which there were The World Register of Marine Species (www. taxonomical doubts or which were not identified, marinespecies.org) was consulted for the most were collected to be identified on board the Cana recent scientific name of the species. (Fig. 3.9 right) or taken to laboratories to be Regarding the fish assemblage structure, it was classified. On board, the specimens collected were described by species richness (nº. of species/125 placed in bowls filled with seawater, observed using m-2), total abundance (no. of individuals/125 m-2) a low power stereo microscope, photographed and total biomass (gr/125 m-2). Fish species (Fig. 3.9, left) and/or anaesthetized, fixed in 10 % biomass was estimated using length-weight formalin in seawater or 70º ethanol, labelled, and relationships calculated from data obtained stored for subsequent transport to the laboratories. from different parts of the Mediterranean Sea. b) Data analisys: At the same time, the underwater We used multivariate techniques that are suited observations in the plastic plates were transferred for ecological data because this allowed the to at note-book, and later to the Excel files. production of a diagnostic on the change of the The determined taxa (at the lowest possible entire fish assemblage. Therefore, non-parametric taxonomic level: species, genus or family) had a approaches were selected by combining non- semiquantitative value (3, abundant, 2, common, metric multidimensional scaling (MDS) and 1, scarce) which allowed us to apply the Margalef SIMPER (Clarke, 1993; Clarke and Warwick, 2001), index, using the PAST program (https://folk.uio.no/ to assess differences in the abundance and ohammer/past/). For visual fish census data, the biomass of the structure of the community within Ecocen program was applied (Bayle et al., 2002). each station by survey year.

19 © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS 4. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

4.1 Geomorphological features sandstone with some limestone sectors. This type of rock allows the profile of the low irregular rocky shore Rocks predominating in the shores of the studied (Fig. 4.1) with a wide variety of biotopes (wide littoral areas, with rare sandy beaches (e.g. Byblos) are mainly platforms, littoral caves, small coves ...).

a b

Figure 4.1. Types of rocky coast in the studied sector: a) low rocky shore with sandstone (Medfoun); b) middle rocky shore with limestone (south of Byblos).

The continental shelf is narrow, varying between 1500m off Ras Amchit and 4000m off Ras el Berbera (Fig. 4.2), which means a slope varying between 5 and 13%.

The varied terrestrial topography is continued in the marine environment with canyons off Selaata and Byblos, rocky escarpments and numerous outcrops (Fig. 4.3), some of them with submarine caves.

Figure 4.2. Studied areas: Batroun-Medfoun (north square); Byblos (south square) (images from Google-Earth and maritime chart INT 3606, 7255)..

21 Figure 4.3. Bathymetry of the Batroun, Medfoun and Byblos areas with the profiles of hydroplane transects.

4.2 Types of substrata b) Sublittoral seafloor (0-50 m down) The seafloor of the area is varied with soft bottoms A great variety of substrate types (hard and soft) were predominating (Fig. 4.5d-f): observed, between 0 and 50 m down (Figs. 4.4 and 4.5). i) fine sand (0-15 m down); ii) gravel and coarse sand (10-50 m down); and muddy a) Littoral rock (0-2 m depth) sand (15-50 m down). As mentioned above, the sandstone and limestone rocks The free calcareous algae on gravel bottoms (Fig. 4.5d) undergo important erosion, which implies an irregular become frequent from 23 m deep. However, rocky coast with wide abrasion platforms, coastal caves, bottoms are also frequent in some areas (off Batroun and coves, big blocks, etc. (Fig. 4.4). Medfoun), with predominating low rock, and high rocky This provides a high variety of biotopes (exposed, outcrops (Fig. 4.5a,b). Calcareous algal concretions sheltered, photophilic, sciaphilic) with their associated (Mesophyllum, Neogoniolithon, Lithophyllum) are flora and fauna. frequent from 40 m down (Fig. 4.5c).

22 a b

c d

e f

Figure 4.4. Morphological features of the littoral rock: (a) coves (Kfar Abida); (b) littoral platforms (Byblos); (c) littoral fringe; (d) rock and soft bottom; (e) big blocks; (f) littoral cave (Kfar Abida).

23 a b

c d

e f

Figure 4.5. Morphological features and substrate types: (a) rocky outcrops; (b) low rock (<1m) with gravel channels; (c) biogenic concretion (>40 m down); (d) gravel and coarse sand; (e) fine sand; (f) muddy sand.

24 4.3 Hydrology The vertical distribution of the temperature is an important factor for understanding the The temperature and salinity profiles in early autumn bathymetric spread of the Lessepsian species. (30/9 - 4/10/2017) show a relative hydrological Based on the profile of the thermocline which homogeneity (25-27ºC, 39.2-39.4 psu) in the first 35m descends, between 40 and 60 m down, from 25 to down (Fig. 4.6). 21 ºC, we can assume that from 60m down, the fauna is typically Mediterranean, this has been a) Temperature: Regarding the depth of the corroborated by the MedKeyHabitats project thermocline, there are differences between the campaign on Lebanon’s deep-sea communities. areas. While off Byblos (H-2) it appears between 35-50 m down, it deepens towards the north, b) Salinity: The vertical distribution of salinity is similar reaching 42-50 m off Kfar Abida (H-3) and 50-60 to that of the temperature. There is a marked m in Batroun (H-1). In Kfar Abida and Byblos from change between. 35-60 m down (39.4-38.6 psu) 60 m down the temperature is < 20ºC; while in off Byblos and Kfar-Abida; while off Batroun this Batroun it begins at 80 m down. marked change appears between 55-65 m down.

Figure 4.6. Temperature (TºC) and salinity (psu) profiles off Batroun (H-1), Byblos (H-2) and Kfar Abida (H-3).

25 © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS 26 5. MARINE BIODIVERSITY

5.1 Taxa of Echinodermata with only 9 taxa (2.7 %). Unlike other campaigns in Lebanon (RAC/SPA-UNEP/MAP, 2014), About three hundred and thirty-nine taxa (320 at lower and despite extensive exploration (0-54 m down), the level: family, genus, species; and 9: at higher level: species Echinaster sepositus, Paracentrotus lividus and class, order), belonging to twenty six higher taxa (phyla, Arbacia lixula were not observed. classes), were observed (see Annex II; Fig. 5.1). The main group was the Mollusca, with 62 taxa (18.8 %), With regard to macroalgae, Rhodophyta with 39 taxa followed by Pisces (59 taxa, 17.9 %) and Porifera (57 (11.8 %), followed by Chlorophyta (15 taxa, 4.5 %). Note taxa, 17.3 %). Worth noting is the low representation the low presence of Ochrophyta (8 taxa, 2.4 %).

Figure 5.1 Number of species/taxa (in red NIS species) and percentage (%) of the main taxa.

27 5.2 Species with HERITAGE and o Appendix II. Species that are not necessarily now interest value threatened with extinction but that may become so unless trade is closely controlled. In this paragraph we include the protected species o Appendix III. Species included at the request of a that were observed during the 2016 assignment (see Party that already regulates trade in the species Annex II). Each species is presented with the common and that needs the cooperation of other countries synonymies, protection status, geographical distribution, to prevent unsustainable or illegal exploitation. habitats, threats and distribution in Lebanon with some • Mediterranean Flora ‘Red Book’ (UNEP/IUCN/GIS- observations. The protection status of the different Posidonia, 1990) Conventions and Directives: • Barcelona Convention 1995/Protocol concerning In addition to these species, we have included other Specially Protected Areas and Biological Diversity ones of economic interest (large Sparidae and in the Mediterranean (with the Marrakech 2009 and Serranidae) observed in the two Lebanon assignments Istanbul 2013 amendments): (2012, 2013). o Annex II. Endangered or threatened species. o Annex III. Species whose exploitation is regulated. 5.2.1 Macrophyta • Bern Convention (1996, 1998) : The main marine macrophytes important for the o Annex I. Strictly protected flora species protection, and observed in the 2016 assignment in o Annex II. Strictly protected fauna species Lebanon appear in the Table 5.1. o Annex III. Protected fauna species Table 5.1. Marine Macrophyta of special interest • Directive Habitat 92/43 CE on the conservation observed in the Lebanon 2016 assignment. of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, European Commission: MACROPHYTA MRB EU BaC BeC o Annex I. Natural habitat types whose conservation requires Special Areas of Conservation Ochrophyta designation. Cystoseira foeniculacea + - II - o Annex II. Species requiring Special Areas of Conservation designation. Rhodophyta o Annex IV. Species in need of strict protection. o Annex V. Species whose removal from the wild Lithothamnion corallioides + V - - can be restricted. Magnoliophyta • Washington Convention. Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Cymodocea nodosa + - II I Flora (CITES): o Appendix I Species that are the most endangered Key: (MRB) Mediterranean Flora Red Book; (EU) Habitat Directive European Union (1992); (BaC) Barcelona Convention (1995); with extinction CITES. (BeC) Bern Convention (1996-98).

28 a) Ochrophyta

Cystoseira cf. foeniculacea (Linnaeus, Greville, 1830)

Common synonymies: C. abrotanifolia (Linnaeus, C. Agardh, 1820); C. discors (Linnaeus, C. Agardh, 1828); C. ercegovicii (Giaccone, 1973). Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II, Marrakech 2009 amendment). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include it in the list of endangered or threatened species. Mediterranean Flora Red Book (UNEP/IUCN/ GIS-Posidonia, 1990). Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediterranean species. NE-Atlantic (southern Spain to Canary Islands) and © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Mediterranean Sea (Cabioch et al., 1995; Ribera et al., 1992). Figure 5.2. Cystoseira cf. foeniculacea thalli sparse on rocky bottom covered by coarse sand, -27 m down (st. Ba-1). Habitat: Infralittoral species on rocky substratum, from calm shallow waters (littoral pools) to sciaphilic lower horizon, 0-50 m down (UNEP/IUCN/GIS Posidonie, 1990; Cabioch et al.,1995; Gómez-Garreta, 2001). Threats: Sediment dumping, hyper-sedimentation, organic pollution, land reclamation, littoral dynamic alterations (marinas, ports). Observations: Relatively common in Batroun, between 25-28 m down (st. B-1). Attached to the flat rock and cobbles; covered by coarse sand and gravel (intense bottom current) where it forms sparse ‘forests’.

b) Rhodophyta

Lithothamnion corallioides (P. L. Crouan & H.M. Crouan, 1867)

Common synonymies: Lithothamnium fructiculosum f.soluta (Foslie 1905); Lithothamnium solutum (Foslie 1908); Lithophyllum solutum (Foslie, Lemoine 1915), Mesophyllum corallioides (Crouan&Crouan, Lemoine). Protection status: Maerl beds (including L. corallioides) are included in the Mediterranean Action Plan for the Conservation of the Coralligenous and Other Calcareous Bio-concretions. Species whose removal from the wild can be restricted (Annex V, EU Habitats Directive 92/43); however, in the Mediterranean must be a priority habitat for conservation (Barberá et al., 2003). Mediterranean Flora Red Book (UNEP/IUCN/GIS-Posidonia, 1990) as a © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS maerl habitat. Figure 5.3. Lithothamnion corallioides rhodolith Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediterranean species. (Nakoura, st. 15, 43 m down). Eastern Atlantic (from Ireland to Cabo Verde Islands) and Mediterranean Sea (www.algaebase.org). Habitat: Circalittoral maerl forming species on coarse sand and fine gravel, and low muddy fraction subject to bottom currents; also on lower infralittoral (Bressan & Babbini, 2003). Threats: Sediment dumping, hyper-sedimentation, being pulled up by fixed bottom nets, trawling. Observations: Rare in the area, localised only in Medfoun at 45-53 m down. (st. M-4).

29 c) Magnoliophyta

Cymodocea nodosa (Ucria, Ascherson, 1870)

Common synonymies: None. Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Annex II, Barcelona Convention, Marrakech-2009 amedment); strictly protected flora species (Annex I, Bern Convention 1996-98). Also, the Cymodocea meadows are located in natural habitats of Community interest (Annex I, Habitat Directive 92/43): sandbanks which are slighly covered by sea water all the time (1110); and large shallow inlets and bays (1160). Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediteranean species. NE-Atlantic (southern Spain to Mauretania) © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS and Mediterranean Sea (Cabioch et al., 1995).

Figure 5.4. Sparse plants of a Cymodocea nodosa meadow Habitat: Infralittoral species on sand and muddy sand in Byblos, -27 m down (st. B-3). bottoms, from shallow waters to 50m down; and coastal lagoons (Pergent, 2009; Rodriguez-Prieto et al., 2013). Threats: Sediment dumping, hyper-sedimentation, organic pollution, land reclamation, dynamic littoral alterations (marinas, ports). Observations: Very rare, only reported off Byblos (st. By- 3), between 27-29 m down. C. nodosa has colonized the muddy sand bottoms with very sparse small plants (Fig. 5.4).

5.2.2 Invertebrata Table 5.2. Marine invertebrata of special interest observed in the 2016 assignment in Lebanon. Marine invertebrates important for protection, observed in the 2016 assignment in Lebanon, are indicated in INVERTEBRATA BaC BeC HD WC Table 5.2. Porifera Aplysina aerophoba II II - - Aplysina sp. plur. II II - - Axinella polypoides II II - - Hippospongia communis Spongia officinalis III III - - Cnidaria Cladocora caespitosa II - - II Phyllangia americana mouchezii II Mollusca Dendropoma anguliferum II II - -

Key: (BaC) Barcelona Convention (1995, 2009, 2013); Tonna galea II II - - (BeC) Bern Convention (1996-98); (HD) Habitat Directive European Union (1992); Washington Convention or CITES (2013). Lithophaga lithophaga II II IV II

30 a) Porifera

Aplysina aerophoba (Nardo, 1833)

Common synonymies: Verongia aerophoba (Nardo, 1843); Aplysina carnosa (Schmidt, 1862). Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II); strictly protected fauna species (Annex II, Bern Convention 1996-98). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include Aplysina spp. plur in the list of endangered or threatened species. Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediterranean species. Eastern Atlantic (from southern Portugal to Cabo Verde, Canary and Madeira Islands), Mediterranean Sea (Moreno © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR et al., 2008).

Figure 5.5. Aplysina aerophoba on rocky substratum Habitat: It is a photophilic species that lives on infralittoral in Batroun, -15 m (st. Ba-4). rocky bottoms, preferably in shallow waters, although it has been cited at 40 m down. (Moreno et al., 2008). Threats: Sediment dumping, anchoring, collection by divers. Observations: A common species in Batroun (st. Ba-1, Ba-4, Ba-5, Ba-6, Ba-7) and Byblos (st. By-4), A. aerophoba was observed on photophilic/hemi-sciaphilic rocky substrata, between 2 to 40 m down, mainly in shallow waters (< 15 m down).

Aplysina sp.

Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II); strictly protected fauna species (Annex II, Bern Convention 1996-98). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include Aplysina spp. plur in the list of endangered or threatened species. Geographical distribution: At present, only observed in Lebanon. Habitat: This species was only sampled in shallow caves. Threats: Organic pollution, erosion by diving, land © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR reclamation, littoral works (marinas, ports). Figure 5.6. Aplysina sp. inside a cave of Medfoun, Observations: The species was only observed in very -3m (st. M-7). local shallow caves (st. M-7), where it was abundant.

31 Axinella polypoides (Schmidt, 1862)

Common synonymies: None. Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II); strictly protected fauna species (Annex II, Bern Convention 1996-98). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include it in the list of endangered or threatened species . Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediterranean species. NE-Atlantic (Southern United Kingdom to Mauretania, Azores, Madeira and Canary islands) and Mediterranean Sea (Moreno et al., 2008). Habitat: Typical circalittoral species that colonizes horizontal and vertical surfaces on rocky substrata. Also, the species is present in infralittoral enclaves on crevices and overhangs. The bathymetric range is from 15 to >300 m down (Moreno et al., 2008), although it is more abundant in the upper circalittoral horizon (40-50 m down). Threats: Sediment dumping, being pulled up by fixed bottom nets, trawling, anchoring, erosion and/or © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA collection by divers.

Figure 5.7. Axinella polypoides on a rocky outcrop Observations: A. polypoides was common in Batroun (st. off Batroun, at 51 m down (st. Ba-6). Ba-6), Medfoun (st. M-4) and Byblos (st. By-5), mainly in the coralligenous community on horizontal and vertical surfaces, between 42-55 m down.

Hippospongia communis (Lamarck, 1814)

Common synonymies: Hippospongia equina (Schmidt, 1862); H. elastica (Lendenfeld, 1889). Protection status: Species whose exploitation must be regulated (Annex III, Barcelona Convention, 1995); protected fauna species (annex III, Bern Convention, 1996). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include in Annex V (species whose exploitation must be regulated). Geographical distribution: Endemic species of the Mediterranean Sea. Reported in the Red Sea (R. van Soest: www.marineespecies.org/porifera). © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA Habitat: Infralittoral and circalittoral species on rocky Figure 5.8. Hippospongia communis off Byblos, substrata, seagrass meadows, coastal detritic and at 40 m down (st. By-5). muddy detritic, between 0.5 to 80 m down in Libya (Vacelet, 1987). Threats: Siltation, hyper-sedimentation, being pulled up by fixed nets, trawling, unregulated collection. Observations: The species seemed very rare in the Lebanon. During the assignment, only one specimen was observed off Byblos at 40 m down (st. By-5).

32 Spongia officinalis (Linnaeus, 1759)

Common synonymies: Euspongia officinalis (Linnaeus, 1759); Spongia adriatica (Schmidt, 1862) ; Spongia mollissima (Schmidt, 1862). Protection status: Species whose exploitation must be regulated (Annex III, Barcelona Convention, 1995); protected fauna species (Annex III, Bern Convention, 1996). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include it in Annex V (species whose exploitation must be regulated). Geographical distribution: Species with temperate-warm affinities with a wide range of geographical distribution © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR (Mediterranean, Eastern and Western Atlantic, Indian Ocean) (Templado et al., 2004) Figure 5.9. Spongia officinalis, dead specimen from south of Byblos, 5 m down (st. By-4) Habitat: On rock (usually on walls, overhangs and cave entrances), seagrass beds and coarse sandy bottoms, from shallow waters to 40 m down (occasionally, some individuals have been caught from 200-300 m down (Templado et al. 2004). Threats: Siltation, hyper-sedimentation, fixed nets, trawling, unregulated collection. Observations: S. officinalis was not a common species, but was spreading in the area: Batroun (st. Ba-5, Ba-6), Kfar Abida (st. K-2, K-3), Medfoun (st. M-7) and Byblos (st. By-7, By-8). It was observed in shallow and deep waters (3-40 m down) and, usually on overhangs and rocky crevices.

b) Cnidaria: Anthozoa

Cladocora caespitosa (Linnaeus, 1767)

Common synonymies: Madrepora flexuosa (Pallas, 1766); Cladocora stellaria (Milne Edwards & Haime, 1849). Hoplangia pallaryi (Joubin, 1930). Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Annex II, Barcelona Convention, Istanbul 2013); Appendix II CITES (Washington Convention, 2013). Geographical distribution: Endemic species of the Mediterranean Sea. The species has also signaled in the NE Atlantic from southern Portugal to Agadir (Morocco) (Zibrowius, 1980). Habitat: Hermatypic coral that lives in photophilic © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER infralittoral bottoms (0-25 m down), although it can reach Figure 5.10. The hermatypic coral Cladocora caespitosa 50 m down in very clear waters. On rocky substrata, in Medfoun at 3m down (st. M-7). Posidonia rhizomes and coastal detritic (Moreno et al., 2008). Threats: Hyper-sedimentation, sediment dumping, trawling, collection by divers, competition with Oculina patagonica. Observations: Very rare species in the area, only one colony was observed in Medfoun (st. M-7, 0-13 m down).

33 Phyllangia americana mouchezii (Lacaze-Duthiers, 1897)

Common synonymies: Coenocyathus apertus (Doderlein, 1913). Protection status: Appendix II CITES (Washington Convention, 2013). Geographical distribution: Eastern Atlantic (from Portugal to Senegal, Azores, Madeira and Canary Islands) and Mediterranean Sea (Zibrowius, 1980). Habitat: Ahermatypic coral that lives in sciaphilic infralittoral and circalittoral bottoms (0-70 m down) (Moreno & López-González, 2008). Threats: Erosion and collection by divers, mooring on circalittoral rocky bottoms, pollution in the caves. Observations: Common species in the area, from 3 to 50 m down, mainly on coralligenous and cave habitats in Batroun (st. Ba-6), Kfar Abida (st. K-3) and Medfoun (st. M-4) © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA Figure 5.11. Phyllangia americana mouchezii off Batroun at 50 m down (st. Ba-6).

c) Mollusca

Dendropoma anguliferum (Monterosato, 1878)

Common synonymies: Vermetus glomeratus (Bivona- Bernardi, 1832), Vermetus cristatus f. minor (Monterosato, 1892). Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II); strictly protected fauna species (Annex II, Bern Convention 1996-98). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include it in the list of endangered or threatened species. © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Geographical distribution: Endemic species of the Medi- terranean Sea, from Gibraltar Strait to Lebanon; also, in the near Atlantic coasts from Spain to Morocco (Tem- plado et al., 2004). Habitat: The species forms dense aggregates on rocky substratum, with the corallinacea Neogoniolithon brassica-florida, usually in the exposed littoral fringe (Templado et al., 2004). Also, on infralittoral photophilic rock at 3 m down (Tabarca Marine Reserve, pers. observ.).

© SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Threats: Sediment dumping, organic pollution, trampling, bait collection (destruction of biogenic formations), Figure 5.12. Bioconstruction of Dendropoma anguliferum covered by algae off Kfar Abida in the station K-4 (up). littoral works (marinas, ports). Vermetid reef off Batroun (bottom). Observations: Present in the littoral fringe from Batroun to Byblos. However, living formations were not abundant, perhaps due to pollution or trampling. Maintenant l’espèce Dendropoma petraeum est divisée en trois espèces D. lebeche, D. cristatum et D. anguliferum (Templado et al. 2016). Pour la Méditerranée orientale, c’est D. anguliferum qui est présente.

34 Tonna galea (Linnaeus, 1758)

Common synonymies: EDolium galea. (Linnaeus, 1758); Buccinum olearium (Linnaeus, 1758). Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II); strictly protected fauna species (Annex II, Bern Convention 1996-98). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include it in the list of endangered or threatened species. Geographical distribution: Species with warm affinities. Eastern Atlantic (from southern Portugal to South Africa), Western Atlantic (from northern Carolina to Brazil), Mediterranean Sea (Templado et al., 2004). © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Habitat: Mainly on sandy bottoms near to detritic Figure 5.13. Piece of Tonna galea shell collected substrata and coralligenous communities on the off Medfoun (st. M-6). continental shelf, usually from 15 to 80m down (Templado et al., 2004). Threats: Trawling, collection by divers. Observations: Very rare in the area, only one empty shell was sampled in Medfoun, between 13 to 22 m down (st. M-6).

Lithophaga lithophaga (Linnaeus, 1758)

Common synonymies: Lithodomus lithophagus (Linnaeus, 1758), Lithophaga mytuloides (Röding, 1798); Lithodomus dactylus (Cuvier, 1817); Lithodomus inflatus (Réquien, 1848). Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II); strictly protected fauna species (Annex II, Bern Convention 1996-98). Species of Community interest in need of strict protection (Annex IV, Habitat Directive 92/43 European Union). Species that are not necessarily now threatened with extinction but that may become so unless trade is closely controlled (Appendix II, CITES, 2013). © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR Geographical distribution: Eastern Atlantic from Figure 5.14. The sea date Lithophaga lithophaga southern Portugal to Angola (also, Canary and Madeira off Batroun (st. Ba-5). . Islands), Mediterranean Sea; also signaled in the Red Sea (Templado et al., 2004). Habitat: Endolithic species on calcareous substrata (rock, corals, biogenic formations), from 0 m to 50 m down; more frequent in shallow waters (0-5 m down) (Moreno et al., 2008). Threats: Highly appreciated resource whose collection implies the destruction of the rocky substratum by divers. Observations: Although, two specimens only were observed in Batroun (st. Ba-5) and Byblos (st. By-4), the species seemed common in the area.

35 5.2.3 Vertebrata Table 5.3. Marine vertebrata of special interest and observed in Lebanon during the 2016 assignment. Marine vertebrata important for protection and observed in the Batroun-Byblos area are indicated in Table 5.3. MARINE VERTEBRATA BaC BeC EU WC Actinopterygii Epinephelus marginatus III III - - Reptilia Key: (BaC) Barcelona Convention (1995); (BeC) Bern Convention (1996-98). Chelonia mydas II II IV I

a) Actinopterygii

Epinephelus marginatus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Common synonymies: Epinephelus guaza (Linnaeus, 1758), E. gigas (Brünnich, 1768). Protection status: Species whose exploitation must be regulated (Annex III, Barcelona Convention, 1995); protected fauna species (Annex III, Bern Convention, 1996). European Union proposal (COM (2009) 585) to include it in the Annex V list of endangered or threatened species whose removal from the wild can be restricted. Endangered species (IUCN Red List, 2004). Geographical distribution: Amphi-Atlantic species. Eastern Atlantic (Brittany Islands to South Africa), © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR Western Atlantic (Bermudan Islands to Brazil), Mediterranean Sea (Tortonese, 1986). Figure 5.15. A juvenile dusky grouper Epinephelus marginatus from Ras-Chekaa at 12 m down. Habitat: Demersal species on hard bottoms and submarine caves, from 0 to 200 m down (Tortonese, 1986). Threats: Over-exploitation by spear-fishing of big individuals (male populations). Observations: E. marginatus seemed rare in the area: Batroun (st. Ba-4), Kfar Abida (st. K-2) and Medfoun (M- 7). Only 3 juvenile individuals were observed at 5-20 m down (st. Ba-4, M-7, K-2).

36 b) Reptilia

Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758)

Common synonymies: Testudo viridis (Schneider, 1783). Protection status: Endangered or threatened species (Barcelona Convention, Annex II); strictly protected fauna species (Annex II, Bern Convention 1996- 98). Species of Community interest in need of strict protection (Annex IV, Habitat Directive 92/43 European Union). Endangered species (IUCN Red List).Migratory species that need or would significantly benefit from international cooperation (Appendix II of Bonn Convention). Geographical distribution: Widely distributed in tropical © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS and subtropical waters, near continental coasts and around islands, rare in temperate waters (Marquez, Figure 5.16. The green turtle Chelonia mydas 1990). at 26 m down (st. By-3). Habitat: Solitary nektonic animal that occasionally forms feeding aggregations in shallow water areas (beaches, bays, lagoons) with seagrass meadows; it lays eggs on beaches (Marquez, 1990). Threats: Destruction of habitats critical to its life cycle (nesting beaches, feeding areas, shallow seagrass meadows), bycatch from trawling, egg collection, collision with vessels. Observations: Only two individuals were observed between 26 to 8 m down, one in Kfar Abida (st. K-3) and one in Byblos (st. B-3), respectively.

37 5.2.4 Other fish species of interest Then we considered other target fish species without any protection status but of economic value that it would be interesting to monitor in and around Marine Protected Areas.

a) Large Serraridae During the diving observations some juveniles of large Serranidae, a part from Epinephelus marginatus, have been reported: E. costae and Mycteroperca rubra. That means the importance of the area as nursery area of these species.

Epinephelus costae (Steindachner, 1878)

Common synonymies: Plectropoma fasciatus (Costa, 1844); Cerna chrysotaenia (Döderlein, 1882); Epinephelus alexandrinus (Valenciennes, 1828), synonymy of E. fasciatus (Forsskål, 1775). Protection status: None. Some Mediterranean countries (France, Spain) have regulated at minimum size for catching large serranids (> 45 cm). Geographical distribution: Eastern Atlantic (from southern Portugal to Nigeria), Mediterranean Sea (exc. northern Adriatic Sea) (Tortonese, 1896). Habitat: Demersal species on rocky and muddy bottoms, © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER juveniles also in seagrass meadows; from shallow Figure 5.17. A juvenile of the golden grouper waters to 300 m down (Tortonese, 1986b). Epinephelus costae off Medfoun (st. M-6). Threats: Over-exploitation by spear-fishing on big individuals (selective hermaphrodite fishing of male populations). Observations: Relatively frequent species in the area: Batroun (st. Ba-4) and Medfoun (st. M-6, M-7), between 2-23 m down but only represented by juvenile individuals (size <25 cm).

Mycteroperca rubra (Bloch, 1793)

Common synonymies: Epinephelus ruber (Bloch, 1793), Mycteroperca scirenga (Rafinesque, 1810), Parepinephelus acutirostris (Valenciennes, 1828), Serranus nebulosus (Cocco, 1833), Serranus armatus (Osório, 1893). Protection status: None. Some Mediterranean countries (France, Spain) have regulated at minimum size for catching large serranids (> 45 cm). Geographical distribution: Amphi-Atlantic species. Eastern Atlantic (form Bay of Biscay to Angola), Western Atlantic (from Bermuda Islands to Brazil), Mediterranean Sea (Tortonese, 1986). © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER Habitat: Demersal species, on rocky and sandy bottoms Figure 5.18. Juvenile comb grouper Mycteroperca rubra at 15-200 m down (Tortonese, 1986); juveniles in shallow off Batroun (st. Ba-5). waters. Threats: Over-exploitation by spear-fishing of big individuals (selective hermaphrodite fishing of male populations). Observations: M. rubra was the most frequent large serranidae species in the area: Batroun (st. Ba-4, Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-4), Medfoun (M-7) and Byblos (By-4, By-7). Nevertheless, no adult was observed; all the individuals were juveniles (size < 25 cm). 38 b) Large Sparidae During the diving observations, Diplodus cervinus and D. sargus were common, whereas D. puntazzo and Pagrus auriga are very rare. Other large sparids as Dentex dentex, Pagrus pagrus and Sparus aurata have not been observed. Among the observed species we can highlight, by the size that can reach (> 50cm): D. crevinus, D. puntazzo and P. auriga.

Diplodus cervinus (Lowe, 1838)

Common synonymies: Diplodus trifasciatus (Rafinesque, 1810). Protection status: None. Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediterranean species. Eastern Atlantic (from Bay of Biscay to Cape Verde Islands, Madeira and Canary Islands), Mediterranean and Black Seas (exc. Lion Gulf) (Bauchot & Hureau, 1986). Habitat: Demersal species on rocky and muddy bottoms, from shallow waters to 300 m down (Bauchot & Hureau, 1986). © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR Threats: damage to juvenile habitats (inshore rocks) Figure 5.19. Two zebra sea bream Diplodus cervinus by organic pollution, siltation or littoral works; over- juveniles off Byblos (st. By-7). exploitation by spear-fishing. Observations: D. cervinus was a common species in the area: Batroun (st. Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-2, K-3), Medfoun (M-7) and Byblos (By-7, By-8). Nevertheless, no adult was observed; all the individuals were juveniles (size < 25 cm).

Diplodus puntazzo (Cetti, 1777)

Common synonymies: Puntazzo puntazzo (Cetti, 1777) Protection status: None. Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediterranean species. Eastern Atlantic (from Bay Biscay to Sierra Leoneay of Biscay, and Cape Verde and Canary Islands), Mediterranean and Black Seas (Bauchot & Hureau, 1986). Habitat: Demersal species on rocky bottoms, from shallow waters to 159m down (Bauchot & Hureau, 1986). Threats: Alteration of the juvenile habitats (inshore © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR rocks) by organic pollution, siltation or littoral works; Figure 5.20. Diplodus puntazzo on a rocky outcrop over-exploitation by spear-fishing. off Bylos, at 5m down (st. By-4). Observations: D. puntazzo was very rare in the area: Only one individual was observed in Byblos, at 6m down (By- 4).

39 Pagrus auriga (Valenciennes, 1843)

Common synonymies: Sparus auriga (Valenciennes, 1843). Protection status: None. Geographical distribution: Atlanto-Mediterranean species. Eastern Atlantic (from Portugal to Angola), Mediterranean Sea, more frequent in the southern sector (Bauchot & Hureau, 1986). Habitat: Demersal and coastal species on rocky and gravel bottoms, from shallow waters to 170 m down; juveniles in shallow waters (Bauchot & Hureau, 1986). Threats: Damage of the juvenile habitats (inshore rocks) © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR by organic pollution, siltation or littoral works; over- Figure 5.21. Juvenile of Pagrus auriga in the tunnel exploitation by spear-fishing. of Raoucheh, at 3m down (2012 assignment). Observations: The species seemed rare, only one juvenile individual was observed in deep waters, 40-50m down off Batroun (st. Ba-6.1). Probably, like other large sparids, the species is subject to high fishing pressure.

5.3 Non-indigenous species (NIS) should be noted that the Lessepsian fish Pterois miles was only observed from 35 m down (Fig. 5.23 right). For exotic species, a total 66 spp. were recorded, 62 spp. Lessepsian and 4 spp. of Atlantic origin (Paraleucilla It is interesting to note the scarce presence or absence magna, Oculina patagonica, Mnemiopsis leidyi and of non-indigenous species, abundant in other time and/ Percnon gibbesi), representing about 20.2 % of the taxa or other areas, probably, due to space-time changes. observed. Figures 5.22 and 5.23 show the number and This is the case of Apogonichthyoides nigripinnis, percentage of species by taxa, respectively: molluscs Stypopodium.schimperi and Percnon gibbesii, very and fishes both with 17 spp. (42.2 % the total). rare in Batroun-Byblos area. Absence of Laurencia cf. chondroides and Lagocephalus sceleratus, very There is a marked decrease in NIS as a function of common in the Saida-Nakoura area in 2013 (RAC/SPA - depth. It can be observed that approximately half the UNEP/MAP, 2013). species decreased per depth range (Fig. 5.23 left). It

Figure 5.22. Number of NIS by taxa.

40 © SPA/RAC, Oscar Ocaña

Figure 5.23. Number of NIS by depth range (exact number inside the rectangles). Pterois miles (right) off Batroun, 49 m down.

5.4 New records for Lebanese a) Macroalgae (Fig. 5.24): The chlorophyta Caulerpa biodiversity taxifolia var. distichophylla, and the rhodophyta Hypo- glossum hypoglossoides, Heterosiphonia crispella Probably thirteen new species were observed for Lebanese and Womerleyella setacea. The NIS species C. taxifo- marine biodiversity in the 2016 assignment. The taxa were lia var. distichophylla and W. setacea were the subject (Fig. 5.24 and 5.25, Annex II): of a recent publication (Bitar et al., 2016).

Figure 5.24. first macroalgae recorded for Lebanon: (a)Caulerpa taxifolia var. distichophylla; (b) Hypoglossum hypoglossides; (c) Heterosiphonia crispella; (d) Womerleyella setacea.

41 b) Invertebrata (Fig. 5.25): The calcareous sponge tyche; the opisthobranchia gastropod Spurilla cf. Borojevia cf. cerebrum and the demosponge Poe- neapolitana, and the Lessepsian bivalve Spondylus cillosclaridae sp; the Lessepsian polychaeta Bran- groschii?. chiomma bairdi; the Lessepsian decapod Halimede

Figure 5.25. New invertebrata recorded for Lebanese fauna: (a) Borojevia cf. cerebrum; (b) Poecillosclaridae sp: (c) Branchiomma bairdi; (d) Halimede tyche; (e) Spurilla cf. neapolitana; (f) Spondylus groschii?.

42 c) Chordata (Fig.5.26): The colonial ascidians of Lissoclinum perforatum: and the gobid fish Gobius the family Didemnidae: Didemnum fulgens and paganellus.

Figure 5.26. New Chordata recorded for Lebanese fauna: (a) Didemnum fulgens; (b) Lissoclinum perforatum; (c) Gobius paganellus.

43 5.5 Fish assemblages and Medfoun (M-5); while the maximum biomass was observed in Batroun (Ba-6, Ba-7) due to the greater size of the population. On the other hand, the lowest value The fish assemblage parameters were rather different was observed in Byblos (By-6), with only a mean of 1 between the studied stations, and during the study, 33 species in 125 m2 (Table 5.4 and Fig. 5.27), due to the fish species were observed, of 12 were non-indigenous homogeneity of the sampled habitat (muddy sand). species (Table 5.4). The mean number of species and The spatial distribution of these fish assemblage values abundance were highest in the stations Batroun (Ba-7) are showed in Figures 5-28, 5.29 3 and 5.30.

Table 5.4. Fish species.

Specie Native (N) Exotic (E) SC TC Total abundance Chromis chromis (Linnaeus, 1758) N 2 MIC 3232 Siganus rivulatus (Forsskål & Niebuhr, 1775 E 3 HBV 1885 Diplodus vulgaris (Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1817) N 3 MEC 1415 Oblada melanura (Linnaeus, 1758) N 1 MIC 1040 Sargocentron rubrum (Forsskål, 1775) E 6 MEC 835 Cheilodipterus novemstriatus (Rüppell, 1838) E 6 MEC 368 Pempheris vanicolensis (Cuvier, 1831) E 6 MEC 324 Plotosus lineatus (Thunberg, 1787) E 4 MEC 219 Thalassoma pavo (Linnaeus, 1758) N 5 MEC 194 Coris julis (Linnaeus, 1758) N 5 MEC 132 Siganus luridus (Rüppell, 1829) E 3 HBV 88 Torquigener flavimaculosus (Hardy & Randall, 1983) E 4 MIC 86 Spicara smaris (Linnaeus, 1758) N 3 MIC 71 Diplodus sargus (Linnaeus, 1758) N 3 MEC 67 Xyrichtys novacula (Linnaeus, 1758) N 5 MEC 44 Sparisoma cretense (Linnaeus, 1758) N 5 MEC 26 Serranus cabrilla (Linnaeus, 1758) N 5 MAC 20 Caranx crysos (Mitchill, 1815) E 1 MAC 18 Serranus scriba Linnaeus, 1758 N 5 MAC 13 Pterois miles (Bennett, 1828) E 6 MAC 9 Fistularia commersonii (Rüppell, 1838) E 4 MEC 5 Stephanolepis diaspros (Fraser-Brunner, 1940) E 5 MEC 5 Pteragogus pelycus Randall, 1981 N 5 MEC 3 Symphodus ocellatus (Linnaeus, 1758) N 5 MEC 3 Dasyatis pastinaca (Linnaeus, 1758) N 6 MAC 2 Epinephelus costae (Valenciennes, 1828) N 5 MAC 2 Symphodus tinca (Linnaeus, 1758) N 5 MEC 2 Apogon imberbis (Linnaeus, 1758) N 6 MEC 1 Apogonichthyoides nigripinnis (Cuvier, 1828) E 6 MEC 1 Diplodus cervinus (Lowe, 1841) N 3 MEC 1 Gymnothorax unicolor (Delaroche, 1809) N 6 MAC 1 Mycteroperca rubra (Bloch, 1793) N 5 MAC 1 Pagrus auriga (Valenciennes, 1843) N 3 MAC 1

Origin: (N) native species; (E) exotic species. Spatial category (SC): (1) highly mobile gregarious, pelagic erratic species; (2) planktophagous and relatively sedentary species, living throughout the water column; (3) demersal mesophagous species, with medium-amplitude vertical movements and relatively broad horizontal movement; (4) demersal species, with slight vertical and high lateral movements; (5) sedentary demersal mesophagous species; (6) highly sedentary cryptic benthic species. Trophic category (TC): (HBV) herbivores; (MIC) microphagic carnivores; (MEC) mesophagic carnivores; (MAC) macrophagic carnivores.

44 Table 5.5. Mean values (± standard error) of number of species, total abundance and total biomass in the studied stations.

Station Ba-6 Ba-7 By-5 By-6 K-1 M-4 M-5 Number of 5.00 ± 0.78 8.75 ± 0.95 4.25 ± 0.63 1.06 ± 0.06 7.88 ± 0.97 3.00 ± 0.71 8.75 ± 0.46 spp./125 m2 Abund. 233.50 ± 543.75 ± 275.75 ± 300.08 ± 33.50 ± 7.24 2.81 ± 0.32 21.25 ± 9.47 (ind./125 m2) 124.21 187.30 70.76 71.68 Biomass 9 312.84 ± 29 519.45 ± 1 915.55 ± 3 694.54 ± 299.28 ± 4 019.38 ± 52.94 ± 11.04 (g/125 m2) 3 422.22 8 920.41 904.63 922.56 197.79 798.71

Figure 5.27. Mean values (± standard error) of number of species (nº of spp/125 m2), total abundance (ind./125 m2) and total biomass (g/125 m2) in the studied stations.

45 Figure 5.28. Spatial distribution of mean number of species (nº of spp/125 m2) in the studied area.

46 Figure 5.29. Spatial distribution of mean total abundance (ind./125 m2) in the studied area.

47 Figure 5.30. Spatial distribution of mean total biomass (g/125 m2) in the studied area.

48 5.5.1 Abundance and biomass observed only in one station: A. imberbis, D. pastinaca, D. cervinus, M. rubra, P. auriga and P. lineatus in Ba-6 Mean abundance (Table 5.6) and mean biomass (Batroun); A. nigripinnis and X. novacula in Byblos (By- (Table 5.7) were characterized for the high presence 6); C. crysos, F. commersonii, G. unicolor, P. vanicolensis of D. vulgaris and O. melanura in Batroun (Ba-7) and and S. tinca in Medfoun (M-5); and E. costae, P. trispilus, S. rivulatus in Medfoun (M-5). Some species were S. smaris and S. ocellatus in Kfar Abida (K-1).

Table 5.6. Mean abundance (ind./125 m2 ± standard error) of the species sampled in each station.

Station Specie Ba-6 Ba-7 By-5 By-6 K-1 M-4 M-5 Apogonichthyoides nigripinnis 0 0 0 0.06 ± 0.06 0 0 0 Apogon imberbis 0.13 ± 0.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 Caranx crysos 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.50 ± 1.50 41.00 ± Cheilodipterus novemstriatus 0 9.75 ± 9.75 0 0 0 0.08 ± 0.08 28.32 85.13 ± 79.75 ± 77.25 ± 132.33 ± Chromis chromis 6.50 ± 4.27 0 0 61.78 79.75 35.75 44.50 Coris julis 0 4.00 ± 1.91 0.25 ± 0.25 0 10.13 ± 1.95 2.50 ± 1.89 2.00 ± 0.62 Dasyatis pastinaca 0.25 ± 0.16 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diplodus cervinus 0.13 ± 0.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diplodus sargus 0.50 ± 0.38 6.25 ± 3.92 0 0 2.75 ± 2.34 0 1.33 ± 0.59 63.88 ± 218.00 ± Diplodus vulgaris 0 0 0.13 ± 0.13 0 2.58 ± 0.56 46.26 140.77 Epinephelus costae 0 0 0 0 0.25 ± 0.16 0 0 Fistularia commersonii 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.42 ± 0.19 Gymnothorax unicolor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.08 ± 0.08 Mycteroperca rubra 0.13 ± 0.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 35.50 ± 189.00 ± Oblada melanura 0 0 0 0 0 23.24 105.84 Pagrus auriga 0.13 ± 0.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 27.00 ± Pempheris vanicolensis 0 0 0 0 0 0 10.24 27.38 ± Plotosus lineatus 0 0 0 0 0 0 25.54 Pterois miles 0.75 ± 0.37 0.75 ± 0.48 0 0 0 0 0 Pteragogus trispilus 0 0 0 0 0.38 ± 0.18 0 0 26.00 ± 50.25 ± Sargocentron rubrum 16.63 ± 8.41 11.75 ± 6.49 0 0 12.42 ± 4.25 17.72 21.06 Serranus cabrilla 0.13 ± 0.13 0.50 ± 0.29 1.50 ± 0.50 0 0.13 ± 0.13 2.00 ± 0.71 0.17 ± 0.11 Serranus scriba 0 0 0 0 0.63 ± 0.26 0 0.67 ± 0.22 Siganus luridus 0.38 ± 0.26 2.00 ± 2.00 10.50 ± 9.53 0 1.25 ± 0.56 4.50 ± 4.50 0.58 ± 0.29 70.38 ± 107.50 ± Siganus rivulatus 2.25 ± 2.25 3.50 ± 2.06 0 0 0 38.64 51.79 Sparisoma cretense 0.13 ± 0.13 0.75 ± 0.75 1.75 ± 1.44 0 0.50 ± 0.33 0.50 ± 0.50 0.75 ± 0.39 Spicara smaris 0 0 0 0 8.88 ± 8.88 0 0 Stephanolepsis diaspros 0.13 ± 0.13 0.50 ± 0.50 0.25 ± 0.25 0 0 0 0.08 ± 0.08 Symphodus ocellatus 0 0 0 0 0.38 ± 0.26 0 0 Symphodus tinca 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.17 ± 0.17 Thalassoma pavo 0 0.25 ± 0.25 0 0 8.63 ± 2.83 0 10.33 ± 2.44 Torquigener flavimaculosus 0 2.75 ± 0.95 1.00 ± 0.71 0 2.88 ± 0.97 11.75 ± 4.55 0.08 ± 0.08 Xyrichthys novacula 0 0 0 2.75 ± 0.30 0 0 0

49 With reference to species abundance, apart from abundance of these seven species represented 90 % of the pelagic schooling species C. chromis, the most total estimated individuals. Between the twelve most abundant species in the entire studied area were S. abundant species, there were 7 non-indigenous species rivulatus (33.7 ± 13.4 ind. m2), D. vulgaris (25.3 ± 13.3 (S. rivulatus, S. rubrum, C. novemstriatus, P. varicolensis, ind. m-2), O. melanura (18.6 ± 9.8 ind. m-2), S. rubrum P. lineatus, S. luridus and T. flavimaculosus). The total (14.9 ± 4.1 ind. m-2), C. novemstriatus (6.6 ± 4.3 ind. abundance of the non-indigenous species represented m-2) and P. varicolensis (5.8 ± 2.6 ind. m-2). The total 38 % of total estimated individuals.

Table 5.7. Mean biomass (g/125 m2 ± standard error) of the species sampled in each station.

Station Species Ba-6 Ba-7 By-5 By-6 K-1 M-4 M-5 Apogonichthyoides nigripinniss 0 0 0 0.1 ± 0.02 0 0 0 Apogon imberbis 2.0 ± 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Caranx crysos 0 0 0 0 0 0 329.3 ± 95.1 Cheilodipterus novemstriatus 0 20.9 ± 10.5 0 0 88.3 ± 31.2 0 0.4 ± 0.1 376.5 ± 640.8 ± 405.8 ± 1039.9 ± Chromis chromis 32.5 ± 16.3 0 0 133.1 320.4 143.5 300.2 Coris julis 0 34.4 ± 17.2 0.4 ± 0.2 0 26.9 ± 9.5 9.7 ± 4.9 20.2 ± 5.8 4040 ± Dasyatis pastinaca 0 0 0 0 0 0 1428.4 Diplodus cervinus 9.4 ± 3.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 425.2 ± Diplodus sargus 37.7 ± 13.3 0 0 41.7 ± 14.8 0 34 ± 10.1 212.6 2246.5 ± 15886.2 ± Diplodus vulgaris 0 0 11.3 ± 4 0 77.6 ± 22.4 794.3 7943 Epinephelus costae 0 0 0 0 70.9 ± 25.1 0 0 Fistularia commersonii 0 0 0 0 0 0 108.2 ± 31.2 Gymnothorax unicolor 0 0 0 0 0 0 54.6 ± 15.8 Mycteroperca rubra 232.1 ± 82.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 725.7 ± 10571 ± Oblada melanura 0 0 0 0 0 256.6 5285.5 Pagrus auriga 14.9 ± 5.28 0 0 0 0 0 0 818.2 ± Pempheris vanicolensis 0 0 0 0 0 0 236.2 448.1 ± Plotosus lineatus 0 0 0 0 0 0 158.4 Pterois miles 121.2 ± 42.9 135.8 ± 67.9 0 0 0 0 0 Pteragogus trispilus 0 0 0 0 2.1 ± 0.7 0 0 980.2 ± 1503.4 ± 1269.3 ± 2395.1 ± 838.3 ± Sargocentron rubrum 0 0 346.6 751.7 634.6 846.8 242.1 Serranus cabrilla 2.3 ± 0.8 7.4 ± 3.7 12.1 ± 6 0 0.7 ± 0.3 10.2 ± 5.1 1 ± 0.3 Serranus scriba 0 0 0 0 21.2 ± 7.5 0 21.0 ± 6.1 392.2 ± Siganus luridus 16.3 ± 5.8 64.1 ± 32.1 0 46.8 ± 16.5 144.2 ± 72.1 27.6 ± 8 196.1 496.9 ± 573.9 ± Siganus rivulatus 48.3 ± 17.1 88.3 ± 44.1 0 0 0 175.7 165.7 Sparisoma cretense 2.8 ± 1 41.4 ± 20.7 57.3 ± 28.7 0 12.5 ± 4.4 8.8 ± 4.4 21.9 ± 6.3 Spicara smaris 0 0 0 0 24.4 ± 8.6 0 0 Stephanolepsis diaspros 8.9 ± 3.2 35.7 ± 17.8 132.2 ± 66.1 0 0 0 1.3 ± 0.4 Symphodus ocellatus 0 0 0 0 1 ± 0.4 0 0 Symphodus tinca 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 ± 4.9 Thalassoma pavo 0 0.1 ± 0.1 0 0 14 ± 5 0 32.8 ± 9.5 Torquigener flavimaculosus 0 64.8 ± 32.4 19.7 ± 9.9 0 34.9 ± 12.3 126.6 ± 63.2 1.1 ± 0.3 Xyrichthys novacula 0 0 0 52.9 ± 13.2 0 0 0 50 5.5.2 Spatial categories in Byblos (By-5 and B-6, respectively); S. rubrum and C. novemstriatus (COE6) in Kfar Abida (K-1); and T. For spatial categories, the fish assemblage was manly flavimaculosus (COE4), in Medfoun (M-4). dominated by very mobile pelagic species and relatively sedentary species. These results are due to the high On the other hand, there were some differences abundance of the species O. melanura and C. chromis, when observing biomass data for spatial categories the only COE1 and COE2 species, respectively (Table (Table 5.9). The main difference was the high value of 5.8). The main differences for each station were due COE6, the cryptic species, due to the presence of big to the greater abundance of some species: S. rubrum individuals of D. pastinaca in Ba-6 (Batroun), S. rubrum (COE6) and X. novacula (COE5) were very abundant in Ba-7 (Batroun) and G. unicolor in M-5 (Medfoun).

Table 5.8. Mean abundance (ind./125 m2 ± standard error) for spatial categories.

Station Ba-6 Ba-7 By-5 By-6 K-1 M-4 M-5 189.00 ± COE1 35.50 ± 23.24 0 0 0 0 1.50 ± 1.50 105.84 COE2 85.13 ± 61.78 79.75 ± 79.75 6.50 ± 4.27 0 77.25 ± 35.75 0 132.33 ± 44.50 229.75 ± COE3 67.25 ± 46.37 10.50 ± 9.53 0 83.38 ± 39.07 4.50 ± 4.50 112.00 ± 51.86 139.81 COE4 27.38 ± 25.54 2.75 ± 0.95 1.00 ± 0.71 0 2.88 ± 0.97 11.75 ± 4.55 0.50 ± 0.19 COE5 0.50 ± 0.19 6.00 ± 2.61 3.75 ± 2.10 2.75 ± 0.30 21.00 ± 4.46 5.00 ± 2.48 14.17 ± 2.42 COE6 17.75 ± 8.51 36.50 ± 18.64 11.75 ± 6.49 0.06 ± 0.06 91.25 ± 45.87 0 39.58 ± 13.91

(1) very mobile pelagic species, (2) moderately sedentary pelagic species, (3) demersal species moving moderately along a vertical axis, (4) nekto-benthic species, (5) relatively sedentary species, (6) cryptic species.

Table 5.9. Mean biomass (g/125 m2 ± standard error) for spatial categories.

Station Ba-6 Ba-7 By-5 By-6 K-1 M-4 M-5 725.66 ± 10571.03 ± 329.28 ± COE1 0 0 0 0 497.91 4028.50 329.28 376.48 ± 640.75 ± 405.78 ± 1039.89 ± COE2 32.50 ± 18.77 0 0 249.85 640.75 138.51 369.05 2373.10 ± 16463.78 ± 392.18 ± 621.16 ± 144.20 ± 714.02 ± COE3 0 1512.26 10919.88 226.73 215.70 144.20 186.35 448.10 ± COE4 64.80 ± 24.86 19.70 ± 17.66 0 34.90 ± 13.74 126.48 ± 49.12 109.31 ± 50.82 406.43 246.08 ± 201.93 ± COE5 118.95 ± 89.98 52.86 ± 11.02 149.25 ± 59.25 28.63 ± 11.57 115.29 ± 21.74 230.22 121.81 5143.43 ± 1660.15 ± 1269.25 ± 2483.46 ± 1711.57 ± COE6 0.08 ± 0.08 0 3220.85 819.15 734.05 1027.7 646.57

51 5.5.3 Trophic categories Kfar Abida (K-1) and Medfoun (M-5). However, mean biomass for trophic categories (Table 5.11) was For trophic categories (Table 5.10), the microphagus affected for the observed macrophagous species D. species C. chromis and O. melanura were the most pastinaca in Batroun (Ba-6) and for big individuals of abundant, followed by the mesophagous species, the mesophagous species S. rubrum and P. varicolensis mainly S. rubrum. The herbivorous, represented by in Kfar Abida (K-1) and Medfoun (M-5). only two species of Siganus, were observed mainly in

Table 5.10. Mean abundance (ind./125 m2 ± standard error) for trophic categories in the studied stations.

Station Ba-6 Ba-7 By-5 By-6 K-1 M-4 M-5 CMC 1.25 ± 0.59 1.25 ± 0.25 1.50 ± 0.50 0 1.00 ± 0.42 2.00 ± 0.71 2.42 ± 1.52 271.50 ± CMM 120.75 ± 78.88 7.50 ± 4.29 0 89.00 ± 40.07 11.75 ± 4.55 132.42 ± 44.51 184.97 265.50 ± CMS 108.88 ± 50.24 14.00 ± 6.07 2.81 ± 0.32 114.13 ± 48.08 3.00 ± 1.91 57.17 ± 14.99 129.45 HBV 2.63 ± 2.35 5.50 ± 1.89 10.50 ± 9.53 0 71.63 ± 38.71 4.50 ± 4.50 108.08 ± 51.79

CMC: macrophagous; CMM: microphagous; CMS: mesophagous; HBV: herbivorous.

Table 5.11. Mean biomass (g/125 m2 ± standard error) for trophic categories in the studied stations.

Station Ba-6 Ba-7 By-5 By-6 K-1 M-4 M-5 4395.63 ± 405.93 ± CMC 143.23 ± 82.83 12.05 ± 2.61 0 92.83 ± 55.18 10.18 ± 2.69 3083.49 329.76 1117.06 ± 11276.58 ± 465.03 ± 1040.99 ± CMM 52.18 ± 31.84 0 126.48 ± 49.12 609.52 4576.32 157.86 369.11 3735.59 ± 17947.30 ± 1459.10 ± 2593.03 ± 1970.94 ± CMS 52.94 ± 11.04 18.48 ± 11.30 1699.41 10610.89 811.96 1046.10 651.70 392.18 ± 543.68 ± 144.20 ± 601.48 ± HBV 64.56 ± 53.92 152.38 ± 69.01 0 226.73 230.93 144.20 180.27

CMC: macrophagous; CMM: microphagous; CMS: mesophagous; HBV: herbivorous

Fish size structure was similar for all the stations (Fig. different in Medfoun (M-4), where the medium big 5.31), with small, medium small and medium sizes individuals clearly dominated the community due to the dominating the fish assemblage. This pattern was presence of P. varicolensis belonging to this size.

52 Figure 5.31. Mean abundance (ind./125 m2 ± standard error) of fish assemblage size structure in the studied stations.

53 5.5.4 Differences between stations (Byblos) and the other six stations (Fig. 5.32). This was due to the habitat of this station, with a 100 % muddy Looking for differences between stations, the two- sand cover and represented by the dominance of X. dimensional nMDS ordination of abundances showed novacula. that the fish assemblages varied mainly between By-6

Figure 5.32. Two-dimensional nMDS ordination of abundance of species observed at each underwater visual census.

Regarding these differences in the fish assemblage 10.77 in Ba-6 (Batroun) and 36.88 in M-5 (Medfoun). between stations, an analysis of similarity (SIMPER) These similarities were mainly due to S. rubrum in Ba-6 (Table 5.12) helped identify the most important species (Batroun) and By-6 (Byblos), S. rivulatus in K-1 (Kfar in each one. The station with highest similarity was Abida) and M-5 (Medfoun), O. melanura in Ba-7 (Batroun) By-6 (Byblos), with X. novacula contributing 100 %. In and T. flavimaculosus in M-4 (Medfoun). the other stations, the mean similarity ranged between

54 Table 5.12. Analysis of similarity (SIMPER) of abundance of species sampled in each station. Only species that contribute up to 85 % of the dissimilarity are indicated.

ABU % sim % acu Station Ba-6 SM=10.77 S. rubrum 16.63 42.28 42.28 D. vulgaris 63.88 27.49 69.76 C. chromis 85.13 14.39 84.16 O. melanura 35.50 6.74 90.90 Station By-5 SM=18.57 S. rubrum 11.75 53.60 53.60 C. chromis 6.50 17.73 71.32 S. cabrilla 1.50 16.87 88.19 Station K-1 SM=26.38 S. rivulatus 70.38 27.32 27.32 C. chromis 77.25 26.96 54.28 S. rubrum 50.25 20.81 75.10 C. julis 10.13 11.56 86.66 Station M-5 SM=36.88 S. rivulatus 107.50 39.78 39.78 C. chromis 132.33 36.63 76.41 T. pavo 10.33 7.42 83.83 P. vanicolensis 27.00 7.00 90.83 Station Ba-7 SM=28.28 O. melanura 189.00 51.40 51.40 D. vulgaris 218.00 39.69 91.09 Station By-6 SM=73.62 X. novacula 2.75 100.00 100.00 Station M-4 SM=35.53 T. flavimaculosus 11.75 76.22 76.22 S. cabrilla 2.00 21.25 97.46

SM: mean similarity; ABU: mean abundance (ind./125 m2); % sim: percentage contribution of each species in the station similarity; % acu: accumulated percentage.

55 © SPA/RAC, Yassine Ramzi Sghaier 6. BENTHIC BIONOMY AND HABITATS

The biocenosis, habitats and associations (with facies) followed the classifications of UNEP/MAP-RAC/SPA (1998, 2002), mainly based on Pérès & Picard (1964), Péres (1967) and Bellan-Santini et al (1994), according to division by stages: supralittoral, midlittoral, infralittoral and circalittoral; and after by substrata (hard and soft). We included species that are most abundant and/or characteristic of the observed megabenthos (phyto and zoobenthos, fishes; see Annex II (inventory of taxa)).

6.1 Hard substrata

The MDS (Fig. 6.1) analysis for stations on hard substrate has distinguished five groups belonging to stage: i) littoral (0 m depth); ii) infralittoral (0-40 m depth); and Figure 6.1. MDS analysis distinguishing groups of littoral (L), infralittoral (I) and circalittoral (C) stations (see Annex I). iii) circalittoral (40-55 m depth). Within the infralittoral zone 2 groups were separated by depth: (I-1) stations between 0 and 10 m down; and (I-2) stations between 10 and 40 m down. In the same way, within the circalittoral floor groups were seperated by locality: (C-1) Batroun; (C-2) Medfoun and Byblos.

6.1.1. Biocenosis of supralittoral rock (RAC/SPA: I.4.1)

The biocenosis is rich in endolithic cyanobacteria. The main zoobenthos are the gastropods Melarhaphe neritoides and Echinolittorina punctata (Fig. 6.2) and the crustaceans Ligia italica, Euraphia depressa and © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Pachygrapsus marmoratus. Figure 6.2. The supralittoral zone with the littorinids Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-3, K-4), Medfoun Melarhaphe neritoides and Echinolittorina punctata. Batroun. (M-7), Byblos (By-4).

6.1.2. Biocenosis of the upper midlittoral rock (RAC/SPA: II.4.1)

a) Facies with Chthamalus spp. With epilithic and endolithic cyanobacteria; sessile fauna is represented by Chthamalus depressus and Ch. montagui, and mobile fauna by the gastropods Melarhaphe neritoides, Echinolittorina punctata and Patella rustica (Fig. 6.3) and the crustaceans Ligia italica and Pachygrapsus marmoratus. The main facies was the belt with Chthamalus spp. © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-3, K-4), Medfoun (M-7), Byblos (By-4). Figure 6.3. Biocenosis of upper midlittoral rock with Chthamalus spp, Patella rustica and Echinolittorina punctata. Kfar Abida (st. k-4).

57 6.1.3. Biocenosis of lower midlittoral rock (RAC/SPA: II.4.2)

The biocenosis, in its summer aspect, is characterized by the presence of the encrusting corallinalceae Lithophyllum papillosum and Neogoniolithon brassica- florida with the gastropods (Patella spp., Phorcus spp.). The main facies/associations were: a) Association with Lithophyllum papillosum (Fig. 6.4). Fauna in the lower mediolittoral rock was represented mainly by the gastropods Patella ulyssiponensis and Porcus turbinatus, and the crustaceans Chthamalus spp. and Pachygrapsus marmoratus. © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Stations: Kfar Abida (K-4). Figure 6.4. The encrusting rhodophytes Lithophyllum papillosum (whitish) and Neogoniolithon brassica-florida (pinkish) with Patella ulyssiponensis. Kfar Abida (st. K-4).

b) Dendropoma and Neogoniolithon concretions With a the vermetid Dendropoma anguliferum and the calcareous algae Neogoniolithon brassica-marina, forming small cushion and plate structures, and sometimes microatolls (Fig. 6.5a). Vermetid formations appeared developed throughout the area but were covered by algae, and many of the vermetid bio-concretions were dead. Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-4), Medfoun (M-7), Byblos (By-4). © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS

c) Littoral pools sometimes associated with vermetids b (infralittoral enclave, Fig. 6.5b): These infralittoral enclaves are frequent in sandstone and limestone rocks. Macroalgae were abundant: chlorophytes (Cladophora, Ulva, Chaetomorpha, Bryopsis spp.) and rhodophytes (Jania rubens, Ellisolandia elongata, Chondracanthus acicularis). Stations: Kfar Abida (K-4).

58 6.1.4 Biocenosis of midlittoral caves (RAC/SPA II.4.3)

Very abundant in the area, represented by the association with Phymatolithon lenormandii and Hildenbrandia rubra (Fig. 6.6). The sea tomato Actinia schmidti was frequent in this enclave. Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-2, K-3, K-4), Medfoun (M-7), Byblos (By-4, By-8).

6.1.5. Biocenosis of infralittoral algae (RAC/SPA: III.6.1)

The infralittoral rock with macroalgae dominance can © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR reach 42 m down, and the macroalgae can be subdivided Figure 6.6. Midlittoral cave with the encrusting rhodophytes into four groups, according to hydrodynamism Hildenbrandia rubra and Phymatolithon lenormandii. (exposed/sheltered) and light intensity (photophilic/ Kfar Abida (st. K-3). sciaphilic): i) exposed photophilic macroalgae; ii) exposed sciaphilic; iii) sheltered photophilic; and iv) sheltered sciaphilic.

6.1.5.1 Exposed photophilic macroalgae

The width of this horizon depends on hydrodynamism, and can reach about 6-7 m down in a very exposed littoral. Light intensity is very high. a) Association with Jania rubens (Fig. 6.7): The rhodophyte Jania rubens dominated the littoral fringe (0-1 m down). Usually it was accompanied by the rhodophytes Ellisolandia elongata, Palisada perforata, Chondracanthus acicularis and Laurencia obtusa, and the chorophytes Cladophora and Bryopsis spp. Also, the lessepsian species Bryopsis pennata, Acan- thophora nayadiformis and Brachidontes pharaonis were present. The abundance of Elysia grandiflora on Bryopsis, particularly, in Kfar Abida was noted. © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-4), Medfoun Figure 6.7. Jania rubens with Palisada perforata (M-7), Byblos (By-4). on the littoral fringe. Kfar Abida (st. K-4).

6.1.5.2 Exposed sciaphilic macroalgae

a) Association with Ellisolandia elongata (Fig. 6.8): On vertical walls, this corallinacea dominated the substrata, between 0 to 5 m down, with Lithophyllum incrustans. Another rhodophyte was present, Schottera nicaeensis, but rare. Sessile fauna was not abundant with the poriferans (Chondrosia reniformis, Crambe crambe); the hydrozoans (Aglaophenia spp. Pennaria disticha, Macrorhynchia philippina), the anthozoan Oculina patagonica, the cirriped Perforatus perforatus, the crab Atergatis roseus; and the bivalves Chama pacifica and Spondylus spinosus. Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-2, K-3, K-4), Medfoun (M-7), Byblos (By-4, By-7, By-8). © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR Figure 6.8. Association with Corallina elongata; with the bivalves Spondylus spinosus and Chama pacifica. Kfar Abida, 3 m down (st. K-3).

59 6.1.5.3 Sheltered photophilic macroalgae

The width of this horizon depends on the light and may reach 40 m down in horizontal surfaces, with moderate hydrodynamism. a) Association with Spyridia filamentosa (Fig. 6.9): In the littoral platform, behind the break zone, the rhodophyte Spyridia filamentosa was dominant (Fig. 6.9). Other accompanying macroalgae were Jania rubens, Ulva rigida and Bryopsis pennata. For mobile fauna, there were the gastropods Patella and Gibula spp. small paths of Brachidontes pharaonis, the decapods Clibanarius © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS erythropus and Eriphia verrucosa, and Blennidae fishes. Figure 6.9. Brown mats of Spyridia filamentosa on a littoral platform with Jania rubens. Kfar Abida (st. K-4). Stations: Kfar Abida (K-4).

b) Overgrazing facies (Fig. 6.10): In some places the rocky substrata was bare and empty of erect macroalgae; only some encrusting (Lithophyllum incrustant and Neogoniolithon spp.) and erect corallinales (Amphiroa, Ellisolandia, Jania), the ochrophyte Lobophora variegata and the chorophyte Codium taylori were present. This overgrazing was mainly due to the herbivorous pressure of the fishes Siganus rivulatus and S. luridus, because the sea urchins Arbacia lixula and Paracentrotus lividus were absent from the studied zones. Another reason could be the erosion by coarse sand of the rock in heavy storms. Macrofauna was poorly represented, with some encrusting species, © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR such as the poriferans Crambe crambe and the Figure 6.10. Bare rock with corallinales, boring sponges Cliona spp.; the cirripeds Perforatus Crambe and Schizoporella. Byblos, 5 m down (st. By-4). perforatus and Balanus trigonus, the ascophoran bryozoan Schyzoporella errata and the ascidian Phallusia nigra. Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-2, K-3, K-4), Medfoun (M-7), Byblos (By-4, By-7, By-8).

c) Association with Galaxaura rugosa and Corallinales (Fig. 6.11): Extensive in the whole area particularly near the shore, between 1 to 7 m down. The main species were Galaxaura rugosa with branched (Amphiroa rigida, Ellisolandia elongata, Jania spp), and encrusting corallinales (Neogoniolithon sp., Lithophyllum incrustans), and Codium spp. (C. taylori, C. parvulum, C. arabicum). For sessile fauna, the sponges Cambe crambe, Chon- drilla nucula and Ircinia sp., the hydroids Macrorynchia philippina and Pennaria disticha, the cirripeds (Perfora- tus perforatus, Balanus trigonus), and the bivalves Cha- ma pacifica, Spondylus spinosus, Malleus regulus and

Dendrostrea frons were common in this association. © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR The mobile fauna was dominate by the gastropods Cerithium scabridum, Ergalatax junionae, Conomurex Figure 6.11. Association with corallinales and Galaxaura rugosa. Byblos-Amchit, at 7 m down (st. By-8). persicus, the hermit crab Calcinus tubularis, and the fishes Chromis chromis, Thalassoma pavo, Sparidae (Diplodus sargus, D. vulgaris) and Siganidae (Siganus rivulatus). This association could be similar to the overgrazing facies with encrusting corallinales, due to the herbivorous pressure on soft algae by the rabbit fishes Siganidae and Conomurex persicus. Stations: Batroun (Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-1, K-2, K-3, K-4), Medfoun (M-7), Byblos (By-7, By-8).

60 d) Association with Sargassum vulgare (Fig. 6.12): This interesting association was observed in Byblos, between 2 to 5 m down on a rocky outcrop surrounded by fine sand. The thalli had hardly any secondary ramifications (herbivorous pressure?); however, some rare leaves appeared at the base, and Padina pavonica was present, but rare. The concentration of fish was important (Siganidae, Labridae, Sparidae). Stations: Byblos (By-4).

© SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR Figure 6.12. Association with Sargassum vulgare in Byblos, at 2 m down (st. By-4). e) Facies with Chama pacifica and Spondylus spinosus (Fig. 6.13): Although these Lessepsian bivalves can be present from 1 to 40 m down, it between 5 to 30 m down that they were dominant, forming an original facies (no comparable to another one in the Mediterranean), with another associated Lessepsian bivalve, Malleus regulus. The valves created a heterogeneous substratum where algae (Ceramiales, Corallinales), poriferans (Crambe crambe, Petrosia ficiformis), hydrozoans (Macrorhynchia philippina, Pennaria disticha, Eudendrium spp.), serpulids, cirripeds (Balanus © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR spp.), etc. were fixed on the valves. Other common taxa were bryozoans (Schizoporella, Reptadeonella) Figure 6.13. Facies with Chama pacifica and Spondylus and ascidians (Didemnidae spp.). spinosus. Batroun, at 21 m down (Ba-4). Stations: Batroun (Ba-1, Ba-4, Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-1, K-2, K-3), Medfoun (M-5, M-7), Byblos (By-1, By-4, By-7, By-8). f) Association with Codium parvulum (Fig. 6.14): The Lessepsian chlorophyte Codium parvulum dominated a poor rocky habitat with fine sediment from 4 to 27 m down, sometimes associated with Caulerpa lamourouxi. Associated species were: Amphiroa rigida, Crambe crambe, Aplysina aerophoba, Eudendrium spp., Schizoporella errata and Phallusia nigra. Among the fish, the Lessepsian species Cheilodipterus novemstriatus was abundant. © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR Stations: Batroun (Ba-1, Ba-4, Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-1, Figure 6.14. Association with Codium parvulum, with Serranus K-2, K-3, K-4), Medfoun (M-5, M-6, M-7), scriba Batroun, at 22 m down (st. B-4). Byblos By-7, By-8). g) Association with Cystoseira sp. (Fig. 6.15): This interesting association was observed in Batroun, between 19 to 27 m down. Probably the Cystoseira sp. was C. foeniculacea (= C. discors, C. ercegovicii) signaled by Bitar & Kouli-Bitar (2001) and observed in Tyre and Nakoura during the 2013 assignment. The thalli had hardly any secondary ramifications (herbivorous pressure?) and the individuals were more or less isolated. Stations: Batroun (Ba-1, Ba-4). © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS Figure 6.15. Association with Cystoseira sp. off Batroun, at 29 m down (st. Ba-1).

61 6.1.5.4 Sheltered sciaphilic macroalgae

The sheltered sciaphilic algae community was well developed in the area, with the predominance of Peyssonnelia spp.. It appeared in shallow infralittoral enclaves (unlit surfaces: crevices, vertical walls, overhangs) and deep infralittoral rocky surfaces (from 30 m down). a) Association with Lobophora variegata (Fig. 6.16): This ochrophyta was present on subhorizontal and vertical surfaces, between 1 to 35 m down, accompanied by the encrusting rhodophytes Lithophyllum, Neogoniolithon, Mesophyllum and © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR Peyssonnelia spp. Figure 6.16. Lobophora variegata (yellow) with encrusting Stations: Batroun (Ba-4, Ba-5, Ba-7), Kfar-Abida (K-1, corallinales. Byblos, at 5 m down (st. By-4). K-3), Medfoun (M-5, M-7), Byblos (By-4, By- 7, By-8).

b) Association with Peyssonnelia spp. (Fig. 6.17): Well developed on the sciaphilic rock (down to 30 m down on vertical surfaces). The main algae were the rhodophytes Peyssonnelia spp. (inclusing, P. rubra and P. rosa-marina). For sessile fauna, poriferans such as Crambe crambe, Chondrosia reniformis, Aplysilla sulfurea and Ircinia sp were frequent, and the ascidians Didemnidae spp., Herdmania momus and Phallusia nigra. Mobile fauna is represented by the polychaeta Hermodice carunculata; the gastropods Ceritium scabridum and Ergalatax junionae; and the fishes

Sargocentrum rubrum and Tripterygion melanurus. © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER Stations: Batroun (Ba-4, Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-1, K-2, Figure 6.17. Sciaphilic macroalgae with Peyssonnelia spp. and K-3), Medfoun (M-5, M-7), Byblos (By-4). the sponges Aplysilla sulfurea (yellow) and Poecillosclaridae sp. (greenish) with Hermodice carunculata. Byblos at 5 m down (st. By-7).

c) Association with encrusting corallinales and sponges (Fig. 6.18): In deeper rocky infralittoral habitats, between 27 to 43 m down. The corallinales are dominant with encrusting Mesophyllum. Neogoniolithon, Peyssonnelia spp and geniculate species (Amphiroa spp.), the ochrophyte Lobophora variegata, and Cau- lerpa lamourouxi covered flat rock. Poriferans were abundant, particularly species of the Axinellidae (Axinella spp.), Crambe crambe, Phorbas topsenti, Petrosia ficiformis and Aplysina aerophoba. Also, Eudendrium spp. and the bivalves Chama pacifica, Spondylus spinosus and Malleus regulus were common. Mobile fauna was scarce with Synaptula © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA reciprocans and the fishes Coris julis, Serranus ca- Figure 6.18. Encrusting macroalgae on deep rock brilla, Sargocentrum rubrum and Torquigener flavima- (Mesophyllum, Neogpniolithon spp.) with the sponges Aplysina culosus. aerophoba (yellowish), Phorbas topsenti (red) and Crambe Stations: Batroun (Ba-4), Kfar Abida (K-2, K-3), crambe (dark orange). Batroun, at 35 m down (st. Ba-7). Medfoun (M-5, M-6, M-7), Byblos (By-5, By-8).

62 6.1.6 Biocenosis of small blocks

This interesting biotope harboured a complex community of both hard (photophilic, sciaphilic) and soft substrates (Fig. 6.19); and a nursery area for Sparidae. There was a great contrast between the photophylic part, very poor (Ceramiales, Corallinales) and the sciaphilic part (sponges, briozoans, ascidians, serpulids, bivalves). Under stones we observed encrusting macroalgae (Li- thophyllum, Mesophyllum, Peyssonnelia spp.), sponges (Crambe, Phorbas, Haliclona, Terpiops), turbellaria, polychaeta (Serpulidae and Sabellidae spp.), cirripeds (Balanus) gastropods prosobranches (Gibbula, Jujubi- © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR nus, Cerithium, Vermetus triquetrus), opisthobranches Figure 6.19. Under stone encrusting fauna: Serpulodae spp., (Berthellina, ?Philineglossidae), bivalvia (Anomia ephip- sponges, the bivalve Anomia ephippium, bryozoan pium), bryozoans (Watersipora. Reptadeonella) and as- (Watersipora sp.) and ascidians (Didemnidae spp). Byblos, cidians (Cystodytes, Botryllus, Botrylloides, Didemnidae, at 4 m down (st. By-7). Rhodosoma, Herdmania). Stations: Batroun (Ba-4), Kfar Abida (K-2), Byblos (By-7).

6.1.7 Biocenosis of the ‘coralligenous’ (RAC/SPA: IV.3.1)

The biocenoses on circalittoral hard substrata are the coralligenous and the semi-dark caves. Both appeared in enclaves in shallow waters (overhangs, caves entrancies, crevices), and the coralligenous community on horizontal surfaces from 42 m down. During the 2012 and 2013 assignments, the observations were limited, being done at depths of down to 43 m. One of the objectives of the present assignment was to extend the characterization of the coralligenous in Lebanon, performing dives down to 54 m (max. depth of the present study).

a) Coralligenous in infralittoral enclaves (Fig. 6.20): In the infralittoral enclaves of this community (overhangs, cave entrancies, crevices) there was the littoral rocky coralligenous community with the encrusting calcareous algae Lithophyllum strictiaforme, Mesophyllum spp., Neogoniolithon mamillosum and Peyssonnelia spp.; also, the chlorophyte Palmophyllum crissum. Sessile fauna was dominated by the poriferans Crambe crambe, Chondrosia reniformis, Clathrina sp.; the hydrozoans Aglaophenia spp.; the bryozoans Schyzoporella and Reptadeonella spp.; and the ascidians Didemnidae spp. and Herdmania momus. Mobile fauna was represented by the © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR polychaete Hermodice carunculata; the gastropods Figure 6.20. Coralligenous enclave on the infralittoral rock, Cerithium scabridum and Ergalatax junionae; and the with the encrusting corallinaceae Lithiophyllum strictiaforme, fish: Sargocentrum rubrum, Pempheris vanicolensis and the sponges Phorbas topsenti (red), Crambe crambe and Trypterygion melanurum. (orange) and Clathrina coriacea (white). Kfar Abida, at 4 m Stations: Batroun (Ba-4, Ba-5), Kfar Abida (K-1, K-2, down (st. K-2). K-3), Medfoun (M-5, M-7), Byblos (By-4, By-8).

63 b) Coralligenous biocenosis (on circalittoral bottoms) (Fig. 6.21): Macroalgae formed the basal stratum represented by Lithophyllum strictiaforme, Mespohyllum sp. and Peyssonnelia spp; with the chlorophyte Palmophyllum crassum. Codium bursa was common, but the soft rhodophyta (Botryocladia, Halymenia; Hyppoglossum) were rare. The presence of the exotic rhodophyte Womersleyella setacea and the rarity of Stypopodium schimperi were clear. Sessile fauna was abundant with the poriferans Axinella polyploides, A. damicornis, Agelas oroides, Crambe crambe, Phorbas topsenti, Dysidea avara, Petrosia ficiformis, Corticium candelabrum, Niphates © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA toxifera, etc.; the polychaete Serpula vermicularis; Figure 6.21. Coralligenous community on rocky substratum the cnidarians Aglaophenia kirchempaueri, Madracis with the sponges Axinella polyploides and A. damicornis phaerensis and Phyllangia americana mouchezii; the (yellow), Niphates toxifera (brown), Phorbas topsenti (red) and bivalves Spondylus spinosus and Malleus regulus Crambe crambe (orange); with Palmophyllum crassum (green) were present; the bryozoans Frondipora verrrucosa and Phyallangia americana mouchezii (bottom right). and Schizoretepora hassi; and the ascidians Batroum, at 47 m down (st. Ba-6.2). Cystodytes dellechiajei and Didemnidae spp. In some places, the encrusting corallinaceae Mesophyllum, Lithophyllum, Neogoniolithon, Peyssonnelia spp. and sponges Crambe, Phorbas formed concretions on the rocks (Fig. 6.22). Mobile fauna was not abundant, with the hermit crab Dardanus arrosor, the echinoderms Coscinasteria tenuispina (very rare), Ophiothrix fragilis and Synaptula reciprocans; and the fishes Coris julis, Serranus cabrilla, Torquigener flavimaculosum, Sargocentrum rubrum, Plotosus lineatus and Pterois miles. Stations: Batroun (Ba-6), Medfoun (M-4), Byblos (By-5). © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA Figure 6.22. Coralligenous concretions with Mesophyllum and Neogoniolithon spp., and the poriferans Crambe crambe, with remnants of a longline. Medfoun, at 46m down (st. M-4).

6.1.8 Biocenosis of semi-dark caves (RAC/SPA: IV.6.2)

The entrance to the caves was colonised by the coralligenous community with the encrustant algae Mesophyllum sp, Lithophyllum strictiaforme, Peyssonnelia spp. On more sciaphilic surfaces poriferans were abundant (Fig. 6.23) with Demospongiae Aplysilla sulfurea, Crambe crambe, Chondrosia reniformis, Haliclona fulva, Terpiops sp. and Calcarea (Borojevia cf. cerebrum, Clathrina spp., Sycon spp.); the madreporarians Phyllangia americana mouchezii and Polycyathus muellerae; the bryozoan Margaretta cereoides; and the ascidians Didemnidae © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR spp., Herdmania momus and Cystodytes dellechiajei. Figure 6.23. Semi-dark cave habitat with the sponges Mobile fauna is represented by Hermodice carunculata Haliclona fulva, Crambe crambe and Borojevia cf. cerebrum, and the scleractinian Phyllangia americana mouchezii. and the fishes Pempheris varicolensis (very common), Kfar Abida, 3 m down (st. K-3). Sargocentrum rubrum and Tripterygion melanurum; the Mediterranean fish Apogon imberbis was very rare. Stations: Batroun (Ba-4, Ba-5, Ba-6), Kfar Abida (K-1, K-2, K-3), Medfoun (M-4, M-5, M-7), Byblos (By- 4, By-5, By-8).

64 6.1.9 Biocenosis of caves and ducts in total darkness (RAC/SPA: V.3.2)

This bathyal biocenosis was present in enclaves in the infralittoral and circalittoral stages, where deep caves and ducts are present. It was only observed in the inner part of the Virgin’s Cave off Batroun at 47 m down. The substratum was dark brown and covered only by Serpulidae spp. (Fig. 6.24), and some rare sponges (e.g. Myrmekioderma spelaeum). Stations: Batroun (By-6).

Although the coast is predominant rocky, and a large part of the infralittoral bottoms off Batroun is low flat rock, the soft substrates (cobbles, pebbles, gravel, sand and muddy sand) dominate the whole area.

6.2.1 Biocenosis of well sorted fine sands (RAC/SPA: III. 2. 2)

The biocenosis spreads throughout the area, between 0 to 12 m depth, and the deep ripple-marks attest to the strong hydrodynamism of the area (Fig. 6.25). The fauna is similar to the rest of the Mediterranean with the bivalves Acanthocardia tuberculata, Atlantella pulchella, Spisula subtruncata, Mactra stultorum, Donax semistriatus, Loripes orbiculatus, Pitar rudis, Glycymeris spp.; the gastropods: Nassarius gibbosulus, N. circumcinctus, Tritia mutabilis, Neverita josephina; the crustaceans Diogenes pugilator and Liocarcinus vernalis; and the irregular sea © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR urchin Echinocardium mediterraneum. Among the fish, Figure 6.25. Well sorted fine sands with the hermit crab were many Xyrichtys novacula, and in lower abundance Diogenes pugilator inside Nassarius circumcinctus shells. Lithognathus mormyrus. Byblos, at 7 m down (st. By-4). Stations: Batroun (Ba-4), Medfoun (M-5, M-6), Byblos (By-3, By-4, By-6, By-7).

6.2.2 Biocenosis of muddy sand

a) Association with Caulerpales Caulerpa prolifera, C. lamourouxi and C. taxifolia var. distichophylla formed fairly broad turfs between 10 and 43 m down on muddy sand. (Fig. 6.26a,c), although they can reach 46 m down. In the same way, from 39 m to 46 m down, C. scapelliformis formed extensive prairies (Fig. 6.26b). The gastropod Rhinoclavis kochi was common; and on the leaves of C. taxifolia var. distichophylla the anemone Buneopsis strumosa, particularly between 13 to 16 m down (Fig. 6.26d). The ascidian Microcosmus exasperatus formed small biogenic blocks where algae were fixed. Stations: Batroun (Ba-1, Ba-2, Ba-3), Medfoun (M-5), Byblos (By-2, By-3, By-6).

65 Figure 6.26. Caulerpales: (a) Caulerpa prolifera (Batroun at 26 m down, st. Ba-1); (b) C. scapelliformis (Batroun, at 46 m down, st. Ba-2); (c) C. lamourouxi (Batroun at 22 m down, st. Ba-4); (d) C. taxifolia var. distichophylla with Bunodeopsis strumosa (Byblos at 15 m down, st. By-6).

b) Association with Cymodocea nodosa It was observed off Byblos, at 27-29 down (Fig. 6.27), without forming a meadow, only small and isolated plants, probably, come from the germination of seeds. The same was observed in Enfeh during the 2012 assignment. Stations: Byblos (By-3).

66 6.2.3 Biocenosis of coarse sands and gravels (RAC/SPA: III.3.2)

Gravel and coarse sand under the influence of bottom currents were widespread in the area, particularly off Batroun (between 12 to 46 m down), sometimes with pebbles and sparse rhodolithes, on flat rocky bottoms, pools and channels between rocks, both in the infralittoral and circalittoral stages. In some places, the chlorophyte Caulerpa lamourouxi covered the coarse sediment (Fig. 6.28). Fauna was poor in species, with the irregular echinoid Brissus unicolor, the holothurian

Synaptula reciprocans, the bivalve Venus verrucosa © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS (shells) and the characteristic fish Gobius bucchichii. Figure 6.28. Gravel and coarse sand with some Stations: Batroun (Ba-1, Ba-3, Ba-7), Medfoun (M-1, rhodolithes and Caulerpa lamourouxi. M-6). Batroun, at 27 m down (st. Ba-1).

6.2.4 Biocenosis of muddy detritic bottoms (RAC/SPA: IV. 2. 1)

An interesting facies was observed off Batroun at 46 m down, represented by a Sabella pavonina aggregation. (Fig. 6.29). Stations: Batroun (Ba-2).

6.2.5 Biocenosis of coastal detritic bottoms (RAC/SPA: IV. 2. 2)

With the ‘maërl facies’ (RAC/SPA: IV.2.2.2), deep maërl © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS beds were present throughout the area, between 33-54 Figure 6.29. Some tubes of the Sabella pavonina aggregation. m down. The substratum was formed of shell gravel Batroun, at 46 m down (st. Ba-2). and coarse sand, with the rhodolithes Lithothamnion corallioides, Mesophyllum sp. and Spongites fruticulosus (Fig. 6.30) with the chlorophytes Caulerpa scapelliformis and Flabellia petiolate. The tests of the irregular sea urchin Echinocyamus pusillus were frequent, and the epifauna was scarce with the holothurian Synaptula reciprocans. Stations: Batroun (Ba-1, Ba-6), Medfoun (M-1, M-2, M-3, M-4), Byblos (By-1, By-5).

6.3 Bionomical mapping

Figures 6.31 to 6.33 show the distribution of the main © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA biocenoses observed in the Batroun-Byblos sector Figure 6.30. Maërl bed with Lithothamnion corallioides carried out by transects and plot dives, between 0-54 m and Spongites fruticulosus. down. Medfoun, at 50 m down (st. M-4).

67 Figure 6.31. Batroun area.

68 Figure 6.32. Medfoun area.

69 Figure 6.33. Byblos area.

70 © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER 71 © SPA/RAC, Alfonso ESPLA 72 7. EVALUATION OF THE ZONES

To assess the zones we considered five parameters 7.1 Taxa biodiversity (biodiversity, habitats, interesting spp., fish biomass and naturalness of the zones) that can give a comparative Table 7.1 shows number of species by zone, relative and objective assessment of their conservation. abundance and the Margalef Index of species richness.

Table 7.1 Species parameters by zone.

Parameters/zones Batroun Kfar Abida Medfoun Byblos Total Nº plot dives/station 8 4 8 8 28 Depth range (m) 0-50 0-23 0-53 0-54 0-54 Taxa richness 160 170 172 198 334 Relative abundance 680 641 559 678 2538 (RA) Margalef Index (M) 24.38 26.15 27.03 30.22 42.48 Nº habitats/zone 23 18 20 22 28 Margalef Index/habitat 1.06 1.45 1.35 1.37 1,52 (M/H) RBI (MH/1.52) 0.7 0.95 0.89 0.9 1

(RBI) Relative Biodiversity Index

a) Taxa richness: Byblos presented the highest values Also, it is necessary to adjust these values to of S (≈ 200 spp.), followed by Medfoun and Kfar the total number of samples (total spp., relative Abida (≈170-172); Batroun presented the lowest abundance and habitats) where MH = 1.52 (the value (160 spp.). Margalef Index value with the total species and its relative abundance). Table 7.1 presents the b) Relative abundance/station (RA): Batroun and number of habitats (biocenosis, associations or Byblos presented the highest values (≈ 680) and facies) observed by zone and the MH value. With Medfoun the lowest (≈ 560). However, if we take the this adjustment, Kfar Abida presented the highest average by station (RA/plot dives), Kfar Abida had values (0.95), whereas Batroun had the lowest (0.7); the highest (160.25/station). Medfoun and Byblos were quite similar (≈ 0.9). c) Margalef Index (M): It is a good index of species richness when there is information about the relative 7.2 Evaluation of habitats abundance of the species. The indices varied within a narrow margin, the highest being in Byblos (≈ 30) To assess the habitats (biocenosis, associations or and the lowest in Batroun (≈ 25). facies), we followed the UNEP/MAP (1998) valorisation, adapting the criterion values to the different habitats d) Index MH: However, the Margalef Index depends on (Table 7.2). These habitats, structurally and functionally the variety of habitats which harbor different species. dependent on their complexity and heterogeneity and, as To compare the different zones, it is helpful to know so as the human impacts, harbour a different diversity the mean species richness-abundance by habitat of species, some of them of great ecological (key-stone with the Margalef Index (M/H): species), heritage (vulnerable and endangered species), M/H = Margalef Index/number of habitats rarity and/or economic value.

73 Table 7.2. Evaluation of the habitats.

HABITAT S V PV R A E HV C B. supralittoral rock 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 N B. upper mediolittoral rock ------F. with Chthamalus spp. 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 N - A. Lithophyllum papillosum 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 N B. lower mediolittoral rock ------Pools and lagoons associated with vermetids 2 2 3 2 2 1 1.00 P - A. Neogoniolithon brassica-florida with Dendropoma 2 3 3 2 2 1 1.20 P B. midlittoral caves 3 3 3 3 3 2 1.83 P B. infralittoral algae ------A. Callithamnion granulatum 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 N - F. Overgrazing with encrusting algae 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 N - A. Jania rubens 2 2 1 1 2 1 0.50 N - A. Sargassum vulgare 3 2 2 1 3 2 1.17 P - A. Cystoseira sp. 2 2 2 3 2 2 1.17 P - A. Corallina elongata 2 1 1 1 2 1 0.33 N - F. Chama pacifica and Spondylus spinosus 2 1 1 1 1 2 0.33 N - A. Galaxaura rugosa 2 1 1 1 1 1 0.17 N - A. Codium parvulum 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.00 N - A. Lobophora variegata 2 1 1 1 1 1 0.17 N - A. Peyssonnelia spp. 2 2 2 2 2 1 0.83 P - A. Encrusting Corallinaceae and sponges 2 2 2 1 2 1 0.67 N B. small blocks 2 3 2 1 2 3 1.17 P B. coralligenous ------F. Coralligenous (infralittoral enclaves) 3 3 3 3 3 2 1.83 P - A. Coralligenous (circalittoral) 3 3 3 3 3 3 2.00 P B. semi-dark caves 3 3 3 3 3 3 2.00 P B. caves and ducts in total darkness 3 3 3 3 3 2 1.83 P B. fine and muddy sands ------A. Cymodocea nodosa 2 3 3 2 2 3 1.50 P - A. Caulerpales 1 1 1 2 2 1 0.33 N B. coarse sands and fine gravels 2 2 1 2 1 1 0.50 N B. coastal detritic bottom ------Maerl facies 3 3 3 3 3 2 1.83 P B. muddy detritic bottom ------F. Sabella pavonina 2 1 2 2 2 1 0.67 N

Criteria: (A) aesthetic value; (E) economic significance; (HV) habitat value; (PV) Heritage value; (R) rarity; (S) species richness; (V) vulnerability. Classification (C): (P) priority habitat; (N) no important habitat. Evaluation: (3) high value; (2) medium value; (1) low value. (modified from UNEP/MAP, 1998).

74 Some of these could be considered as priority, i.e. Table 7.3 represents the evaluation of the zones requiring, due to their vulnerability, their natural according to the habitat values (see table 7.2). We have heritage quality, their rarity or their high aesthetic value, calculated a value (relative value of habitats), considering specific protection whereas the biocenosis itself or the the sum of the values of the habitats in each zone divided other associations/facies are of no specific interest. by the number of habitats by zone, which gives us an Moreover, the evaluation levels of each criterion can average of the value of the habitat/zone (MHVZ: medium vary as a function of the local conditions (UNEP-MAP, habitat value per zone). And in order to homogenize the 1998). values, each MHVZ was divided by the average value of all habitats / zones, obtaining the relative value of the The habitat value (HV) of the habitats represents the habitats by zone (RVHZ; see Table 7.3). sum of the different criterion values (Table 7.2: S, V, P, R, A, E) divided by 6 (number of criteria). Habitats with The relative values of the habitats by zone have been similar (0.9-1.0), being Byblos and Medfoun the highest value 1 (which represents the minimum value) are not (0.98), and Kfar Abida the lowest (0.89).However, Kfar considered, that is the reason for subtracting 1: Abida have not been sampled coralligenous deep Habitat value (HV) = (Σ S+V+P +R+A+E / 6) -1 bottoms (> 40m down).

Table 7.3. Relative value of habitats (RVH) by zone.

HABITAT /ZONE HV Ba K M By Pools and lagoons associated with vermetids 1 1 1 - - B. Midlittoral caves 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 A. Neogoniolithon brassica-florida with Dendropoma 1.2 1.2 1.2 1,2 1.2 A. Jania rubens 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 A. Sargassum vulgare 1.17 - - - 1.17 A. Cystoseira sp. 1.17 - 1.16 - 1.17 A. Corallina elongata 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 F. Chama pacifica and Spondylus spinosus 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 A. Galaxaura rugosa 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 A. Lobophoravariegata 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 A. Peyssonnelia spp. 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 A. Encrusting Corallinaceae and sponges 0.67 0.67 - 0.67 0.67 B. Small blocks 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 A. Cymodocea nodosa 1.5 - - - 1.5 B. Coarse sands and fine gravels, bottom currents 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 F. Coralligenous (infralittoral enclaves) 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 B. Coralligenous 2 2 - 2 2 B. Semi-dark caves 2 2 2 2 2 B. Caves and ducts in total darkness 1.83 1.83 - - - A. Caulerpales 0.33 0.33 - 0.33 0.33 Maerl facies 1.83 1.83 - 1.83 1.83 F. Sabella pavonina 0.67 0.67 - - - Total Value/Zone (ΣHV) 23.03 19.19 13.03 15.52 19.53 Nº Habitats/Zone (HZ) 22 19 14 15 19 Medium Habitat Value/Zone (MVZ = ΣVZ/HZ) 1.05 1.01 0.93 1.03 1.03 Habitat Index (HI = MVZ/1,05) 1.0 0.96 0.89 0.98 0.98

(Ba) Batroun; (By) Byblos; (K) Kfar Abida; (M) Medfoun. (HV) habitat value: (B) biocenosis; (A) association; (F) facies.

75 7.3 Interesting species V); Red Book of Mediterranean vegetation (UNEP/IUCN/ GIS Posidonie, 1990) and CITES (Annexe II); with large Another important criterion to establish Marine Protected Sparidae and Serranidae of economic interest. Areas is the presence of species with heritage value Batroun presented the highest value (0.37), followed by (included in the Barcelona Convention, 1995 (Marrakech, Medfoun (0.33) and Byblos (0,26); Kfar Abida had the 2009: Annexes II and III), Bern Convention 1997-98 lowest (0,21). However, Kfar Abida was not sampled for (Annexes I-II); EU Habitat Directive 92/43 (Annexes II, IV, coralligenous deep bottoms (> 40 m down).

Table 7.4. Species with heritage value (Barcelona Convention, 1995) and economic interest distributed by zone.

Species/Zones Ba K M By HV Cystoseira cf. foeniculacea 2 - - - 3 Lithothamnion corallioides 1 - 2 1 3 Cymodocea nodosa - - - 1 3 Aplysina aerophoba 3 - - 2 3 Aplysina spp. - - 3 - 3 Axinella polypoides 3 - 2 2 3 Hippospongia communis - - - 1 3 Spongia officinalis 2 2 1 2 3 Cladocora caespitosa - - 1 - 3 Phyllnagia americana 3 1 2 - 3 Dendropoma anguliferum 1 2 1 1 3 Tonna galea - - 1 - 3 Lithophaga lithophaga 1 1 1 1 3 Diplodus cervinus 1 1 2 2 3 Epinephelus costae 1 1 1 - 3 Epinephelus marginatus 1 1 1 - 3 Mycteroperca rubra 1 2 1 1 3 Pagrus auriga 1 - - - 3 Chelonia mydas - 1 - 1 3 Σ spp. values by zone (ΣVZ) 21 12 19 15 57 ISI (ΣVZ/57) 0.37 0.21 0.33 0.26 1

(Ba) Batroun; (By) Byblos; (HV) highest value (V = 3); (K) Kfar Abida; (M) Medfoun; (ISI) interesting species index. Relative abundance: (3) abundant; (2) common; (1) scarce.

7.4. Fish biomass of species OF species richness, abundance and biomass) by zone are fishing interest previously treated in Paragraph 5.4 (Fish populations). Table 7.5 summarizes the commercial fish biomass by zone. The study of the commercial fish populations offers an important criterion for establishing Marine Protected Areas because it represents the local fishermen’s main The fish biomass index (FBI in Table 7.5) is the result resource, and this resource must be exploited rationally, when the mean biomass of the zone is divided by in order not to exhaust it. The fish parameters (mainly 12417.34 gr/125m2 (max. biomass of species).

76 Table 7.5. Commercial fish species and its biomass (gr/125 m2) accordingt to the zone.

Species/Zones Ba K M By MV Caranx chrysos - - 164,64 - 164,64 Diplodus cervinus 4,72 - - - 4.72 Diplodus sargus 231,43 41,86 17,49 - 231,43 Diplodus vulgaris 9066,37 11,28 38,78 - 9066,37 Epinephelus costae - 70,91 - - 70,91 Fistularia commersonii - - 54,11 - 54,11 Mycteroperca rubra 116,03 - - - 116,03 Pagrus auriga 7,47 - - - 7,47 Sargocentron rubrum 1241,82 2395,14 419,17 634,63 2395,14 Serranus cabrilla 4,88 0,74 5,58 6,03 6,03 Serranus scriba - 21,18 10,52 - 21,18 Siganus luridus 40,19 46,78 85,91 196,09 196,09 Sparisoma cretense 22,09 12,48 15,35 28,67 28,67 Spicara smaris - 24,35 - - 24,35 Symphodus tinca - - 8,49 - 8,49 Xyrichthys novacula - - - 26,43 26,43 Σ Fish biomass/zones (FBZ) 10735.00 2624,72 820,04 891,85 12417,34 FBI (BZ/20765.34) 0.86 0.21 0.07 0.07 1

(Ba) Batroun; (K) Kfar Abida; (M) Medfoun; (By) Byblos; (MV) max. value/zone. (FBI) Fish Biomass Index.

7.5 Evaluation of uses/impacts and • Tourism: marinas (0-3), bathing (0-1), boating/ naturalness mooring (0-3). • Industry (ports, sediment/mineral discard, concrete, The studied zones are subject to different uses and oil): industrial sewage discard (0-3). human activities (industry, commercial, traditional and The use/impact index (UI, Table 7.6) by zone was creational fisheries, tourism, littoral urbanisation, local calculated from the sum of the use-impact values/zone population; Table 7.6), i.e. a variety of impacts and, divided by 39 (MVU = 13 uses-impacts x 3). To assess subsequently, possible threats. the zones, from the point of view of conservation, we • Littoral frequentation: urbanisation: domestic sewage calculated the Naturalness Index (NI = 1-UI). discards (values = 0-3), solid waste (0-2), trampling (0- Although the littoral of the zones presented many uses 2). and impacts (industry, littoral urbanization, different • Fishing: commercial (nets and traps, long-lines), fishing activities, sewage discard…), some areas remain shore angling (0-1), spearfishing (0-3), bait collection little altered, like Kfar Abida and Medfoun. These areas (0-3), lost nets (mainly mono-filaments and traps => are interesting for establishing protection measures ghost fishing) (0-3). with low impact uses.

77 Table 7.6. Uses and impacts of the zones.

Uses-Impacts / Zones Ba K M By MVU Commercial fishing 3 2 2 2 3 Shore angling 3 2 2 3 3 Spearfishing 3 3 3 3 3 Lost nets (ghost fishing) 2 1 1 2 3 Trampling 3 2 2 3 3 Bait and shell-fish collecting 3 2 2 3 3 Mooring 2 1 1 3 3 Ports, marinas, cove fishing 2 - - 3 3 Solid waste 2 2 2 3 3 Domestic sewage discard 2 1 1 2 3 Industrial sewage discard 1 - - 1 3 Beach/bathing 2 2 2 3 3 Urbanisation 3 1 1 3 3 Σ uses-impact values (ΣUV) 31 19 19 34 39 Uses-impacts Index (UI = ΣUV/39) 0.79 0.49 0.49 0.87 1 Naturalness Index (NI=1 – UI) 0.21 0.51 0.51 0.13 0

(Ba) Batroun; (K) Kfar Abida; (M) Medfoun; (By) Byblos; (MVU) max. value of the uses-impacts. Relative evaluation of the use/Impact: (3) very important; (2) more or less important; (1) not important;

7.6 Evaluation of zones value of each index (MV) (Table 7.7). From which, we have established three levels of conservation: To assess the zones, once the five indices are obtained i) high (CI >0.67); (biodiversity, habitats, interesting species, commercial ii) medium (CI = 0.67-0.33); and fish biomass and naturalness), the conservation value iii) low (CI <0.33). (CV) of each zone is calculated from the sum of these indices. According to these levels, Batroun (0.84) and Kfar Abida- The conservation index (CI) is the result of dividing the Medfound (≈ 0.75) present a high level of conservation. conservation value (CV) by the sum of the maximum While Byblos has a medium level (0.64).

Table 7.7. Evaluation of zones.

Index Ba K M By MV Biodiversity (B) 0.70 0.95 0.89 0.9 0.95 Habitats (H) 0.96 0.89 0.98 0.98 0.98 Interest spp. (IS) 0.37 0.21 0.33 0.26 0.37 Fish biomass (FB) 0.86 0.21 0.07 0.07 0.86 Naturalness (N) 0.21 0.51 0.51 0.13 0.51 CV = Σ(B+H+IS+F+N) 3.10 2.77 2.78 2.34 3.67 CI (CV/3.67) 0.84 0.75 0.76 0.64 1.00

(Ba) Batroun; (K) Kfar Abida; (M) Medfoun; (By) Byblos. (MV) max. value zones ; (EV) environmental value ; (CI) environmental relative index.

78 7.6.1 Batroun (Fig. 7.1) a

An important historical and tourist area with the city of Batroun (45,000 residents) and a fishery port with small- scale fishery fleet (Fig.7.1a). Place of historical interest with the Phoenician wall (Fig.7.1b) and medieval city. a) Geomorphology: The coast is predominantly low rocky with wide littoral platform and small caves and coves. On the seabed the low rock is dominated by channels of coarse sand and gravel. Some rocky outcrops appear between 40 and 50 m down, like the one where the Virgin’s Cave is present. b) Taxa biodiversity: The Margalef Index was the © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS lowest (24.38), with a taxonomic richness of 160 taxa and a relative biodiversity index of 0.7. b c) Habitats: It presented, a high habitat index (0.96). Among the habitats of interest are: i) Cystoseira sp., between 19 and 27 m down; ii) small blocks community; iii) coralligenous and maërl, between 40 and 50 m down; iv) semi-dark and dark cave communities. d) Interesting species: Although it presented the lowest biodiversity index, in terms of species of interest, the index was the highest (0.37); outstanding were: Cystoseira sp, Aplysina aerophoba, Axinella © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS polypoides, Spongia officinalis and Phyllangia c americana mouchezii. e) Commercial fish biomass: It was the area with by far the highest biomass of all the studied areas (≈ 18 kg/125 m2), emphasizing Diplodus vulgaris (≈ 9 kg/125 m2) and Sargocentrum rubrum (1.2 kg / 125 m2). f) Uses-impacts: Batroun is a populated village and tourist place (high urbanization) with a big traditional fishery (lost nets). Therefore, the uses and impacts from human frequency are high (shore angling, spearfishing, trampling, solid waste, beach/bathing). Next to the village is the big industrial area of Selaata. © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS The naturalness index was low (0.21). d g) Environmental evaluation: Despite the low environmental assessment, the total assessment of the area was the highest (0.84), because it presented the highest indices in species of interest (0.37), commercial fish biomass (0.86) and a high habitat index (0.96). h) Other interesting features: The presence of the CNRS Marine Research Center in Batroun (Fig. 7.1c) gives an important scientific, academic and educational aspect. Access to the rocky coastline (wide platforms and littoral pools) and to the community of small blocks (cove near the CNRS) allows the study and practice of marine ecology. Also, we © SPA/RAC, Oscar OCANA should emphasize the presence of circalittoral rocky Figure 7.1. Batroun area: a) Batroun fishery port; outcrops (40-50 m down) with coralligenous and b) low littoral rocky coast with the Phoenician wall in the caves (Fig. 7.1d), one of them having an image of the background of the photograph; Virgin Mary; however, due to strong currents, diving (c) the Marine Research Center (CNRS); (d) coralligenous and must only be done with trained personnel. cave communities, at 47 m down (st. Ba-6.2).

79 7.6.2. Kfar Abida - Medfoun (Fig. 7.2) a

An interesting area south of Batroun with a relatively low density of construction (Kfar Abida and Medfoun villages; Fig. 7.2a), some tourism with relatively low human frequentation (Fig. 7.2b). The coast is well conserved, without marinas or ports. a) Geomorphology: The coast is predominantly irregular low rocky with wide littoral platform and small caves and coves (Fig. 7.2c,d); some small beaches in the Medfoun area. © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR b) Taxa biodiversity: Both areas presented a similar Margalef Index (MI = 26-27; 170-172 taxa). However, when divided by the number of habitats, Kfar Abida b presented the highest (RBI = 0.95). c) Habitats: The habitat index varied between the highest (0.98) in Medfoun and the lowest (0.89) in Kfar Abida. Deserving special mention was the good conservation of shallow habitats (< 25 m down), particularly, Dendropoma anguliferum formations, Cystoseira sp. association, small blocks and littoral caves with infralittoral enclaves of the coralligenous. In Medfoun, circalittoral bottoms (46-53 m down): coralligenous

community and maërl beds. © SPA/RAC, Ghazi BITAR d) Interesting species: For species of interest, the index varied between 0.33 (Medfoun) and 0.21 c (Kfar Abida). These species included: Lithothamnion corallioides, Aplysina spp., Axinella polypoides, Spongia officinalis, Cladocora caespitosa, Phyllangia americana mouchezii, Dendropoma anguliferum , Diplodus cervinus and Mycteroperca rubra. e) Commercial fish biomass: After Batroun, Kfar Abida was the area with the second highest biomass of commercial fishes (2.6 kg/125 m2; FBI = 0.21), especially Sargocenrum rubrum (≈ 2.4 kg/125 m2). Medfoun with Byblos, presented the lowest index

(0.07), with Caranx chrysos an abundant species (≈ © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS 0.16 kg/125 m2). f) Uses-impacts: There is no major urbanization in the d area, Kfar Abida and Medfoun are small villages, with low-medium tourism. In the absence of significant human concentrations, contamination by solid waste and by residual water is relatively low; and beach activities are localized. However, traditional and recreational fishing (shore angling and spearfishing) are important. g) Environmental evaluation: The two areas hadthe same naturalness index (0.51) and similar environmental conservation value (CI ≈ 0.75). h) Other interesting features: The sandstone rocky littoral © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER of Kfar Abida presents an irregular morphology with Figure 7.2. Kfar Abida and Medfoun areas: wide platforms, littoral pools and midlittoral caves, (a) Kfar Abida village; (b) tourist beach in Medfoun; which (Fig. 7.2c,d) make it particularly interesting (c) rocky littoral coast in Kfar Abida (st. K-4); littoral cave (st. for the study of coastal communities (photophilic/ K-2). sciaphilic and exposed/sheltered enclaves).

80 7.6.3. Byblos (Fig. 7.3) a

An important historical and tourist zone with a small fishery port (Fig. 7.3a,b); it is highly populated (around 100,000 residents in the area), with wide beaches. a) Geomorphology: The zone presents some long beaches with localized rocky shore. Within the rocky areas with wide coastal platforms is Fartouch with a medium profile (Fig. 7.3c). b) Taxa biodiversity: The Margalef Index was the highest (30.22), with a taxonomic richness of 198 © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS taxa; although considering habitats by zone it held second place (RBI = 0.90), below Kfar Abida (0.95). b c) Habitats: It presented, with Byblos, the highest habitat index (0.98). Among the habitats of interest were: i) Cystoseira sp., between 19 and 27 m down; ii) small blocks community; iii) coralligenous and maërl, between 40 and 50 m down; iv) semi-dark and dark cave communities. d) Interesting species: For species of interest, the index was one of the lowest (0.26), outstanding © SPA/RAC, Alfonso RAMOS were: Cymodocea nodosa, Aplysina aerophoba, c Axinella polypoides, Spongia officinalis and Diplodus cervinus. e) Commercial fish biomass: It presented, together with Medfoun, the lowest value (FIB = 0.07). However, some species were more abundant in this area (kg/125 m2): Siganus luridus (≈ 0.2), Sparisoma cretense and Xyrichthys novacula (≈0.03). f) Uses-impacts: Byblos is a populous tourist village (high urbanization) with a big traditional fishery (presence of lost nets) and recreational boats (mooring). Therefore, the uses and impacts caused © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER by human frequentation are high (shore angling, spearfishing, trampling, solid waste, beach/ d bathing), and thus naturalness was very low (0.13). To the north of the village there is an important industrial area close to Hay Al Arab. g) Environmental evaluation: Despite the low environmental assessment, the total assessment of the area was 0.64, which represents a medium value. However, Byblos had high taxa biodiversity (0.9) and habitat index (0.98). h) Other interesting features: The littoral platforms around the port are wide (Fig. 7.3a), allowing the © SPA/RAC, Yassine R. SGHAIER observation and study of their associated flora and fauna. On the other hand, Fartouch represents Figure 7.3. Byblos area: a) general view of the village with a small coastal oasis within an overcrowded area the Crusader fortress; (b) Byblos port with pleasure craft; (c) Fartouch coast; (d) infralittoral rock in Fartouch (st. By-8). (Fig. 7.3c,d).

In the previous paragraph, we have assessed the However, it presented areas of interest, such as the different zones (taxa biodiversity, habitats, interesting extensive littoral platforms and the Fartouch area. species, fish populations, naturalness) and thus we can Human pressure is very high. establish two management areas (Fig. 8.1): Due to the high human presence (villages, fishermen, i) Batroun-Medfoun; and tourism, etc.) strictly protected area status connot apply, ii) Byblos at least on the coast. However, three different levels of protection could be applied to the different zones: a) Batroun-Medfoun (together with Kfar Abida): i) integral protection (core zone); Between Ras Selaata (in the north) and Ras Barbara. It presented the highest values (0.84- ii) partial protection (buffer zone) with prohibition/ 0.75) with an interesting rocky outcrop (40-50 m regulation of some impact activities; and down) with coralligenous, semi-dark cave and dark iii) resource management area (multiuse zone) with cave communities off Batroun. The rocky shore regulation of certain uses. A fourth status is is irregular with wide littoral platforms and pools, included (educational zone) of interest for popular and the cove near the CNRS center harbors an education. interesting community of small blocks. Although there is high human pressure concentrated in the As in our previous work (RAC/SPA-UNEP/MAP, 2014), Batroun sector, this is not very strong (compared we applied zoning based on the biosphere reserves idea to Byblos), proof of this being the high value of the (Price et al., 1993), managing IUCN’s Marine Protected conservation index (CI > 0.75). Areas (Day et al., 2012), and adapting them to the needs of the conservation and rational exploitation of marine b) Byblos: Between Ras Amchit (in the north) and Fidar resources, mainly fishing, leisure and tourism (Ramos- (south). It presented the lowest CI value (0.64). Esplá, 2007).

Figure 8.1: Proposed zones: (A) Batroun-Medfoun; (B) Byblos. Image from Google Earth.

83 8.1 Zoning ii) Kfar Abida (Figs. 8.2K and 8.3K). Some soft activities permitted: bathing, snorkelling and 8.1.1 Batroun-Medfoun Area (Fig. 8.2) scuba-diving. No traditional or recreational fishing, bait collection, mooring, or increased It comprises about 12 km of littoral, between Capes urbanization of the zone. Selaata and Barbara and the isobaths 0-50 m down c) Educational zone (yellow): Apart from the historical (about 2000 m from the coast), covering a surface of value of the Phoenician wall, the coast around the about 3000 ha (Figs. 8.2). wall and the cove near the oceanographic center a) Core zone (blue): Rocky outcrop off Selaata Cape, (Figs. 8.2B and 8.3B) are of easy access and have between 40-50 m down (Fig. 8.2), with the Virgin’s interesting communities (wide littoral platforms and cave. In spite of being in front of the industrial complex pools, small blocks), and possess an educational of Selaata, the strong currents in the zone prevent the potential at graduate and baccalaureate level. It will arrival of fine sediment. It represents an important cover an area of 30 ha (1000 x 300 m). enclave of the corallligenous, semi-dark and dark communities. Also, it could be a potential breeding d) Multi-use or peripheral zone (red): Given the place for large serranids, if fishing (commercial and good conservation of the coast, it is necessary recreational) is prohibited. The protected area is to implement an integrated plan of coastal zone circular, with the top of the outcrop, about 500 m in management with the aim of protecting and diameter (≈ 75 ha.). Given the interesting formation at preserving this part of northern Lebanon. Activities the peak of the rocky outcrop and the presence of a big currently carried on in the marine environment cave, it is suggested that the protection status for this (bathing, traditional fishing, recreational fishing from area be that of Natural Monument (IUCN category: III). the shore, scuba diving), may continue. Industrial activities and the direct discharge of sewage and/ b) Buffer zones (green): Based on its state of or sediment, and the leaving of debris or trash on conservation, ecological interest (littoral platforms, the shore should not be permitted. Also, a plan is midlittoral caves, blocks, pools) and relatively low needed to avoid the pollution and sedimentation human impact, we can establish 2 buffer zones of produced by the Selaata industrial complex, located about 50 ha (rectangle: 1000 x 500 m): north of Batroun. i) Barbara zone (Figs 8.2M and. 8.3M); and

Figure 8.2. Batroun-Medfoun marine protected zones: (B) Batroun (educational zone); (K) Kfar Abida (buffer zone); (M) Medfoun (buffer zone); (R) rocky outcrop (core zone). Red lines: defining the proposed managed area. Image from Google Earth.

84 Figure 8.3. Buffer and educational zones in the Batroun-Medfoun area: (M,K) buffer zones of Medfoun and Kfar Abida, respectively; (B) educational zone of Batroun. Images from Google Earth.

8.1.2 Byblos Area collection, mooring or increased urbanization of the zone. It comprises about 6 km of littoral, between Hay Al Arab c) Educational zone (yellow): The coast around the small (north) and Fidar (south) and the isobaths 0-50 m down, harbor and crusader fortress, apart from its historical covering a surface of about 1000 ha (Figs. 8.4). interest, presents wide littoral platforms interesting a) Core zone (blue): Rocky outcrop off Fidar, between communities (wide littoral platforms and pools, 40-55 m down (Fig. 8.4R). It represents an enclave small blocks) (Fig. 8.4B and 8.5B), and possesses of the coralligenous and semi-dark communities. educational potential at graduate and baccalaureate Also, it could be a potential breeding place for large level. It will cover an area of 30 ha (1000 x 300 m). serranids, if fishing (commercial and recreational) d) Multi-use or peripheral zone (red): Given the high is prohibited. The protected area is circular, with the pressure on the coast, it is necessary to implement top of the outcrop, about 500m in diameter (≈ 75 an integrated plan of coastal zone management ha.). with the aim of protecting and preserving this area. b) Buffer zones (green): Based on its state of conservation, ecological interest (littoral platforms, Activities currently carried on in the marine environment midlittoral caves, blocks, pools) and relatively low (bathing, traditional fishing, recreational fishing from the human impact, the Fartouch zone (Figs. 8.4F and shore, scuba diving) may continue. However, industrial 8.5F) meets these requirements, preserving its natural activities and the discharge of sewage and/or sediment, state with little human pressure. The protected area is and leaving of debris or trash on the shore should not be about 50 ha (500 x 1000 m) and some soft activities permitted. Also, a plan is needed to avoid the pollution can be permitted such as bathing, snorkelling and and sedimentation produced by the Hay Al Arab industrial scuba-diving. No traditional or recreational fishing, bait complex, located north of Byblos.

85 Figure 8.4. Byblos proposed marine managed and protected zones: (B) Byblos (educational zone); (F) Fartouch (buffer zone); (R) rocky outcrop (core zone). Red lines: delimitation of the proposed managed area. Image from Google Earth.

Figure 8.5. Buffer and educational zone in the Byblos area: (F) buffer zones of Fartouch; (B) educational zone of Byblos. Images from Google Earth.

8.2 Management measures To this effect, the Protocol concerning Specially Protected Areas (SPA) and Biological Diversity in the To avoid as far as possible human impacts on a MPA, it is Mediterranean (Barcelona Convention, 1995) states in necessary to consider management planning through the Article 7-1: ‘The Parties shall, in accordance with the zoning of the protected area. Management and zoning may rules of international law, adopt planning, management, resolve some conflicts between users of the coastal zone supervision and monitoring measures for the SPAs. (industrial/tourism/conservation, selective/no selective Later (Art. 7-2), it indicates the measures that should fishing methods, commercial/creational fishing, scuba be included for each SPA. Table 8.1 summarises the diving/spear-fishing) and make protection compatible with possible uses and management measures. the rational exploitation of the area.

86 Table 8.1. Possible uses and management measures in the different zones in the marine protected/managed areas.

Uses/Zones CZ BZ MZ Recreational fishing (nets, traps) N N N Debris, trash storage on shore N N N Aquaculture (inshore cages) N N Y

Industry N N Y(1)

Spearfishing N N Y(2)

Dredging N N Y(1)

Sewage dumping N N Y(3) Boating N Y Y Beach/swimming N Y Y Snorkelling N Y Y

Littoral urbanisation N Y(4) Y(4)

Recreational ports N Y(5) Y(5)

Fishery port N Y(5) Y(5)

Mooring N Y(6) Y

Commercial fishing N Y(7) Y(7)

Shore angling N Y(2) Y Research/education Y Y Y

Scuba diving Y(2) Y Y

Tourism, visitors Y(8) Y Y

Zones : (CZ) core zone; (BZ) buffer zone; (MZ) multi-use zone. Uses: (Y) permitted; (N) forbidden. Key to notes (numbers in brackets): (1) to establish anti-pollution measures and the rigorous control of discard; (2) with license/permit; (3) sewage treatment by water treatment plant (the whole area); control of ballast water; (4) integrated coastal zone management (more than 100m to shore-line); (5) only in the current situation; (6) establishment of mooring zones; (7) permitted with restrictions on gear (no monofilament nets); (8) control of visiting.

8.3 Surface cover of marine The Lebanese coast line is 225 km long, and extending protected/managed areas 3 km from the shore to the open sea (reaching the isobath 50 m down), i.e. 675 km2. The present proposal of a MPA network for Lebanon (Fig. 8.6), as the result Table 8.2 summarizes the protected surface of the of the MedMPAnet Project and the 2012, 2013 and 2016 different zones, according to protection level (core, assignments, will provide about 11.5 % of its marine buffer, educational and multi-use zones). environment with a protection mesure.

Table 8.2. Surface (in km2) of the possible MPAs from Batroun-Byblos, according to the different management zones.

Core Educational Multi-use Zones Buffer zones Total zones zones zones

Batroun-Medfoun 0.75 1.00 0.30 30.00 32.05

Byblos 0.75 0.50 0.30 10.00 11.55

Total 1.50 1.50 0.60 40.00 43.60

% 3.40 3.40 1.40 91.80 100

87 Figure 8.6. MPA network (MedMPAnet Project), north to south: (E-R) Enfeh-Ras Chekaa; (Ba-M) Batroun-Medfoun; (By) Byblos; (R) Raoucheh; (S) Saida; (T) Tyr; (N) Nakoura.

Extrapolating the protection results to the rest of the protected and managed areas, according to the IUCN proposed RAC/SPA-UNEP/MAP AMPs (2014), the category, would be (Table 8.3):

Table 8.3. Surface (in km2) of possible Lebanese MPAs, according to the different management zones.

Zones I III IV VI Total Enfeh - - 4.00 - 4 Enfeh-Ras Chekaa - - - 15.00 15.00 Ras Chekaa 10.00 - 6.00 - 16.00 Batroun-Medfoun 0.75 ? 1.00 30.00 31.75 Byblos 0.75 - 0.50 10.00 11.25 Raoucheh - 1.00 - - 1.00 Saida - 1.00 7 8.00 Tyr Springs 1,75 ? 3,25 - 5.00 Tyr - - 10.00 20.00 30.00 Nakoura 9.00 - 21.00 25.00 55.00 Total 22.25 1.00 46.75 107.00 177.00 % Lebanon (675 km2) 3.30 0.15 6.93 15.85 26.23

a) Strictly protected areas or core zones (IUCN d) Protected areas with sustainable use of natural category: I): 22.25 km2 (4.94 %). resources or multi-use zones (IUCN category VI): 107 km2 (23.78 %). b) Natural monument or feature (IUCN category: III): 1 km2 (0.2 %). This is the case of Raoucheh, but If we move to the concept of Marine Protected Areas (IUCN categories I, III and IV) and Marine Managed Areas could also be contemplated for Tyr Springs and the (category VI), the Marine Protected Areas in Lebanon Byblos rocky outcrop. would cover 70 km2 (10.38 %) and the Marine Managed c) Habitat/species management area or buffer zone Areas 107 km2 (15.85 %), i.e. 26.23 % of the total (IUCN category IV): 45.75 km2 (10.37 %). Lebanese marine surface between 0-50 m down.

Ackerman J.L., Bellwood D.R., 2000, Reef fish assemblages: a re-evaluation using enclosed rotenone stations. Marine Ecolology Progress Series 206, 227-237. Aguado, M.T. & San Martín, G. 2007. Syllidae (Polychaeta) from Lebanon with two new reports for the Mediterranean Sea. Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 48: 207-224. Barberá, C. Bordehore, C., Borg, J.A., Glémarec, M. Grall, J., Hall-Spencer, J.M. De La Hoz, C. Lanfranco, E., Lastra, M., Moore, P.G., Mora, J., Pita, M.E., Ramos-Esplá, A.A., Rizzo, M. Sanchez-Mata, A., Seva, A., Schembri, P.J. & Valle, C. 2003. Conservation and management of northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean maerl beds. Aquatic Conservation, Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 13: S65–S76. Barea-Azcón, J.M., Ballesteros-Duperón, E. & Moreno, D. (coords.), 2008. Libro Rojo de los Invertebrados de Andalucía. 4 tomos. Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Andalucía, Sevilla, 1430 pp. Bariche, M. & Trilles, J.P. 2005. Preliminary check-list of Cymothoids (Crustacea: Isopoda) parasitic on marine fishes from Lebanon. Zoology in the Middle East, 34: 53-60. Bauchot, M.L. & Hureau, J.C. 1986. Sparidae. In: Fishes of the North-eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean. Vol. II. P.J.P Whitehead, M.-L. Bauchot, J.-C. Hureau, J. Nielsen & E. Tortonese (eds.). Unesco, Paris: 883-907. Bayle, J.T. & Ramos-Esplá, A.A. 1993. Some population parameters as bioindicators to assess the “reserve effect” on the fish assemblage. En: Boudouresque, C.F., M. Avon y C. Pergent (eds.): Qualite du milieu marin. Indicateurs biologiques et physico-chimiques, GIS Posidonie publ., Fr.: 189-214. Bayle, J.T., Valle, C. & Verdú, A. 2002. “ECOCEN“: An application for managing fish visual counts. Informes y Estudios COPEMED n` 7: 1-124. Bell, J.D., Craik, G.J.S., Pollard, D.A. y Russell, B.C. 1985. Estimating length frequency distributions of large reef fish underwater. Coral Reefs, 4: 41-44. Bellan-Santini, D. Lacaze, J.C. & Poizat, C. 1994. Les biocénoses marines et littorales de Méditerranée: Synthèse, menaces et perspectives. Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Collection Patrimoines Naturels, Vo. 19, 246 pp. Bitar, G. 2010. Impact des changements climatiques et des espèces exotiques sur la biodiversité et les habitats marins au Liban. Rapports Commission internationale Mer Méditerranée, 39: 452. Bitar, G. 2014. Les mollusques exotiques de la côte libanaise. Bulletin de la Societé zoologique de la France, 139(1-4): 37-45. Bitar, G. & Bitar-Kouli, S. 1995a. Aperçu de bionomie benthhique et répartition des différents facies de la roche littorale à Hannouch (Liban-Méditerranée Orientale). Rapports Commission internationale Mer Méditerranée, 34: 19. Bitar, G. & Bitar-Kouli, S. 1995b. Impact de la pollution sur la répartition des peuplements de substrat dur à Beyrouth (Liban- Méditerranée Orientale). Rapports Commission internationale Mer Méditerranée, 34: 19. Bitar, G. & Kouli-Bitar, S. 2001. Nouvelles données sur la faune et la flore benthiques de la côte libanaise. Migration lessepsienne. Thalassia Salentina, 25: 71-74. Bitar, G., Ocaña, O. & Ramos-Esplá, A.A. 2007. Contribution of the Red Sea alien species to structuring some benthic biocenosis in the Lebanon coast (Eastern Mediterranean) Rapports Commission internationale Mer Méditerranée, 38: 437. Bitar, G., Ramos-Esplá, A.A, Ocaña, O., Sghaier, Y.R., Forcada, A. & Valle, C. 2017. The introduced marine macroflora of Lebanon and its distribution on the Levantine coast. Mediterranean Marine Science, 18 (1): 138-155. Bressan, G. & Babbini, L. 2003. Biodiversità marina delle coste italiane. Corallinales del mar Mediterraneo: Guida all determinzione. Biologia Marina Mediterranea, 10 (suppl. 2): 1-237. Cabioch, J., Floc’h, J.Y., Le Toquin, A., Boudouresque C.F., Meniesz, A. & Verlaque, M. 1995. Guía de algas de los mares de Europa : Atlántico y Mediterráneo. Ed. Omega, Barcelona: 249pp. Castelló, J. 2010. Isópodos (Crustacea, Isopoda) litorales del Mediterráneo oriental. XVI Simposio Ibérico de Estudios de Biología Marina, Alicante, Septiembre 2010. Clarke, K.R. 1993. Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology, 18: 117-143. Clarke, K.R. y Warwick, R.M. 2001. Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation, 2nd edition. PRIMER-E: Plymouth, United Kingdom. 165 pp.

91 Crocetta, F., Zibrowius, H., Bitar, G., Templado, J. & Oliverio, M. 2013a. Biogeographical homogeneity in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. I: the opisthobranchs (Mollusca: Gastropoda) from Lebanon. Mediterranean Marine Science, 14 (2): 403-408 + 9pp. Crocetta, F., Bitar, G., Zibrowius, H. & Oliverio, M. 2013b. Biogeographical homogeneity in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. II. Temporal variation in Lebanese bivalve biota. Aquatic Biology, 19: 75-84 Crochetta, F., Bitar, G., Zibrowius, H., Capua, D. Dell’Angelo, B. & Oliverio, M. 2014. Biogeographical homogeneity in the eastern Mediterranean Sea III. New records and a state of the art of Polyplacophora, Scaphopoda and Cephalopoda from Lebanon. – Spixiana, 37 (2): 183-206. Day J., Dudley N., Hockings M., Holmes G., Laffoley D., Stolton S. & S. Wells, 2012. Guidelines for applying the IUCN Protected Area Management Categories to Marine Protected Areas. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN: 36pp. Gómez-Garreta, A. (ed.). 2001. Flora Phycologica Ibérica. I. Fucales. Publ. Universidad de Murcia: 192 pp. Harmelin, J.G. 1987. Structure and variability of the ichthyofauna in a mediterranean protected rocky area (National Park of Port-Cros, France). P.S.Z.N.I.: Marine Ecology, 8(3): 263-284. Harmelin-Vivien, M.L. and Harmelin, J.G. 1975. Présentation d’une méthode d’évaluation «in situ» de la fauna ichtyologique. Travaux scientifiques Parc national Port Cros, 1: 47-52. Harmelin J.-G., Bitar G. & Zibrowius H. 2007. Schizoretepora hassi sp. nov. (Bryozoa ; Phidoloporidae) from Lebanon (Eastern Mediterranean) and reppraisal of Schizotheca seratimargo (Hincks, 1886). Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 48: 179-186. Harmelin J.-G., Bitar G. & Zibrowius H. 2009. - Smittinidae (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata) from coastal habitats of Lebanon (Mediterranean sea), including new and non-indigenous species. Zoosystema 31 (1) : 163-187. Harmelin, J.G., Ostrovsky, A.N., Cáceres-Chamizo, J.P. & Sanner, J. 2011. Bryodiversity in the tropics: taxonomy of Microporella species (Bryozoa, Cheilostomata) with personate maternal zooids from Indian Ocean, Red Sea and southeast Mediterranean. Zootaxa, 2798: 1-30. Harmelin-Vivien, M., Harmelin, J.G., Chauvet, C., Duval, C., Galzin, R., Lejeune, P., Barnabé, G., Blanc, F., Chevalier, R., Duclerc, J. & Lassarre, G. 1985. Evaluation des peuplements et populations de poissons. Méthodes et problèmes. Revue d’Ecologie (Terre Vie), 40: 467-539. Harmelin-Vivien, M.L., Bitar, G., Harmelin, J.G. & Monestiez, P. 2005. The littoral fish community of the Lebanese rocky coast (eastern Mediterranean Sea) with emphasis on Red Sea immigrants. Biological Invasions, 7: 625–637 Katsanevakis, S., Poursanidis, D., Yokes, M.B., Macic, V. Beqiraj, S., Kashta, L., Sghaier, Y.R., Zakhama-Sraieb, R. Benamer, I., Bitar, G., Bouzaza, Z., Magni, P. Bianchi, C.N., Tsiakkiros, L., & Zenetos, A. 2011. Twelve years after the first report of the crab Percnon gibbesi (H. Milne Edwards, 1853) in the Mediterranean: current distribution and invasion rates. Journal of Biological Research-Thessaloniki 16: 224 – 236. Lakkis, S. & Novel-Lakkis, V. 2005. Benthic populations diversity of soft substratum along the Lebanese coast (Levantine Basin, Eastern Mediterranean). Medcore Int. Conf., Firenze. November 2005. LME/IUCN. 2012. Lebanon’s Marine Protected Area Strategy : Supporting the management of important marine habitats and species in Lebanon. the Lebanese Ministry of Environment / IUCN. Beirut, Gland and Malaga: 64 pp. Logan, A., Bianchi, C.N., Morri, C., Zibrowius, H. & Bitar, G. 2002. New records of recent Brachiopods from the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. Annali del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale “G. Doria”, Genova, 94: 407- Marquez, R. 1990. Sea turtles of the World. FAO Species Catalogue, Vol. 11. F.A.O., Rome: 81pp. Moreno, D., de la Linde, A. & Maldonado, M. 2008a. Axinella polypoides. In: Libro Rojo de los Invertebrados de Andalucía. Tomo I. Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Andalucía: 192-195. Moreno, D., Fernández-Casado, M., De la Linde, A. & Maldonado, M. 2008b. Aplysina spp. In: Libro Rojo de los Invertebrados de Andalucía. Tomo I. Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Andalucía: 206-210. Moreno, D., Barrajón, A., Gordillo, I. & López-González, P.J. 2008c. Cladocora caespitosa. In: Libro Rojo de los Invertebrados de Andalucía. Tomo I. Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Andalucía: 256-262. Moreno, D. de la Linde, A. & Remón, J.M. 2008. Lithophaga lithophaga In: Libro Rojo de los Invertebrados de Andalucía. Tomo I. Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Andalucía: 386-392. Moreno, D. & López-González, P.J. 2008. Phyllangia mouchezii. In: Libro Rojo de los Invertebrados de Andalucía. Tomo I. Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Andalucía: 271-276. Morri, C., Puce, S., Bianchi, C.N., Bitar, G., & Zibrowius, H. 2009. Hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) from the Levant Sea (mainly Lebanos), with emphasis on alien species. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 89 (1), 49–62.

92 Pérès, J.M. & Picard, J. 1964. Nouveau manuel de bionomie benthique de la Mer Méditerranée. Recueil des Travaux de la Station Marine d’Endoume, 31(47): 1-133. Perez, T., Vacelet, J., Bitar, G. & Zibrowius, H. 2004. Two new lithistids (Porifera, Demospongiae) from a shallow eastern Mediterranean cave (Lebanon). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 84: 15-24. Price, A.R.G.& Humphrey, S.L. (Eds) 1993. Application of the Biosphere Reserve Concept to Coastal Marine Areas: UNESCO/IUCN San Francisco Workshop 14-20 August 1989. Marine Conservation and Development Report. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. viii+114pp. RAC/SPA-UNEP/MAP, 2014. Ecological characterization of sites of interest for conservation in Lebanon: Enfeh Peninsula, Ras Chekaa cliffs, Raoucheh, Saida, Tyre and Nakoura. By Ramos-Esplá, A.A., Bitar, G., Khalaf, G., El Shaier, H., Forcada, A., Limam, A., Ocaña, O., Sghaier, Y.R. & Vlle, C. Ed. RAC/SPA-MedMPAnet Project, Tunis: 146 pp. Ramos-Esplá, A.A. 1984. Cartografía de la pradera superficial de Posidonia oceanica en la bahía de Alicante. International Workshop on Posidonia oceanica Beds. GIS-Posidonie, Marseille (Francia): 57-61 Ramos-Esplá, A.A. 2007. Marine Protected Areas as a Mediterranean fisheries management tool. FAO-MedSudMed Technical Documents., 3: 61-78. Ribera, M.A., Gómez-Garreta, A., Gallardo, T., Cormaci, M., Furnari, G. & Giaconne, G. 1992. Check-list of Mediterranean Seaweeds. I. Fucophyceae (Warming, 1884): Botanica Marina, 35: 457-465. Rodriguez-Prieto, C., Ballesteros, E., Boisset, F. & Afonso-Carrillo, J. 2013. Guía de las macrolgas y fanerógamas marinas del Mediterráneo occidental. Ed. Omega, Barcelona: 656 pp. Templado, J., Calvo, M., Garvia, A., Luque, A., Maldonado, M. & Moro, L. 2004. Guía de invertebrados y peces marinos protegidos por la legislación nacional e internacional. Naturaleza y Parques Nacionales, Se. Técnica. Mº de Medio Ambiente, CSIC, Madrid, 214pp. Stöhr, S., Boissin, E. & Chenuil, A. 2009. Potential cryptic speciation in Mediterranean populations of Ophioderma longicauda. Zootaxa, 2071: 1-20. Templado, J., Richter, A., Calvo, M., 2016. Reef building Mediterranean vermetid gastropods: disentangling the Dendropoma petraeum species complex. Mediterr. Mar. Sci. 17, 13–31. Tortonese, E. 1986. Serranidae and Moronidae. In. Fishes of the North-eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean. P.J.P. Whitehead, M.L. Bauchot, J.C. Hureau, J. Nielsen & E. Tortonese. Unesco, Paris: 781-796. UNEP/UICN/GIS Posidonie. 1990. Livre rouge « Gérard Vuignier » des végétaux, peuplements et payssages marins de Méditerranée. MAP Technical Reports Series, Athens Nª 43, 250 pp. UNEP-MAP, 1998. Rapport de la réunion d’experts sur le type d’habitats marins dans la région méditerranée. United Nations Environment Program, Mediterranean Action Plan, UNEP (OCA)/ MED WG.149/5, 44 pp. UNEP/MAP-RAC/SPA, 2002. Handbook for interpreting types of marine habitat for the selection of sites to be included in the national inventories of natural sites of conservation interest. Bellan-Santini, D., Bellan, G., Bitar, G., Harmelin, J.G. & Pergent, G. RAC-SPA, Tunis, 217 pp. Vacelet, J. 1987. Eponges. In: W. Fisher, M. Schneider & M.L. Bauchot. Fiches FAO d’Identification des Espèces pour les Besoins de la Pêche. Méditerrnée et Mer Noire. Vol. 1 : Végetaux et Invertébrés. FAO-CEE, Rome : 138-146. Vacelet, J., Bitar, G., Carteron, S., Zibrowius, H. & Perez, T. 2007. Five new sponge species (Porifera: Demospongiae) of subtropical affinities from the coast of Lebanon (eastern Mediterranean). Journal of Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 87: 1539-1552. Vacelet, J. & Perez, T. 2008. Phorbas topsenti and Phorbas tailliezi (Demospongiae, Poecilosterida), new names for the Mediterranean ‘Phorbas paupertas’ and ‘Phorbas coriaceus’. Zootaxa, 1873: 26-38. Vacelet, J., Bitar, G., Dailianis, T., Zibrowius, H. & Perez, T. 2008. A large encrusting clionid sponge in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology, 29 : 1-10. Young, P.S., Zibrowius, H. & Bitar, G. 2003. Verruca stroemia and Verruca splengeri (Crustacea: Cirripedia): distribution in the north-eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 83: 89-93. Zibrowius, H. 1980. Les Scléractiniaires de la Méditerranée et l’Atlantique nord-oriental. Memoires de l’Institut océanographique de Monaco, 11 : 1-227. Zibrowius, H. & Bitar, G. 1997. Scleractinian corals from Lebanon, Eastern Mediteranean, including a non-lessepsian invading species (Cnidaria : Scleractinia). Scientia Marina, 61 (2): 227-231. Zibrowius, H. & Bitar, G. 2003. Invertébrés Marins Exotiques sur la Côte du Liban. Lebanese Science Journal, 4 (1).

93 Annexes Observations Low rock with Corallinales and Ceramiales with Corallinales Low rock Muddy sand and gravel with Caulerpa spp. Muddy sand and gravel Low rock and sand, with Axinella sp. Caulerpales Low rock blocks Maerl, grabel, Rock with Codium parvulum, sand Hydrology Rock, blocks and sand, cave Gravel and rocky outcrops and rocky Gravel Muddy sand Muddy sand, Cymodocea nodosa Rock, blocks, gravel Sand, blocks, rock, Cystoseira, cave Cystoseira, Sand, blocks, rock, Rocky outcrops, sand Rocky outcrops, Rocks, blocks, sand, caves maerl, rock, sand, gravel maerl, rock, Rock with C. parvulum, Chama and Spondylus, cave Rocks with gravel channels ,¬ Rocks with gravel Muddy sand Rock, coralligene Sand, blocks, infralapidicola Rock with sand channels Hydrology Rock, coralligenous, cave Rock, coralligenous, Rock with Chama, coarse sand, gravel and pebbles Rock with Chama, coarse sand, gravel Rock, caves wreck, rock, gravel rock, wreck, Rock, caves Hydrology Muddy sand Rock, coralligenous, cave Rock, coralligenous, Rock, caves Sc Sc Sk Sc Sc Sc Sc Sc Sc Sc Hy Hy Hy Hy Hy Hy Hy Hy Hy Sc,f Sc,f Sc,f Sc,f Sc,f Sc,f Sc,f Sc,f CTD CTD CTD ROV Meth. C C C O O M M M M AF AF AR AR AR G,Y G,Y G,Y G,Y G,Y G,Y G,AB G,Y,Z G,Y,Z AF,C,O AF,C,O AF,C,O AF,C,O AF,AR,C,O AF,AR,C,O AF,AR,C,O AF,AR,C,O Observers ------37' 26.2'' 38'35.20'' 39' 19.99'' 38' 45.64'' 38' 44.74'' 37' 28.92'' 39' 03.28" 39' 20.81" 37' 32.53'' 38' 21.99'' 38' 54.32'' 38' 14.11" 38' 26.65" 37' 47.36'' 38' 37.68" 38' 29.06" 39' 12. 55" 39' 14. 24" Long 35ºE (f) ------15' 47.93'' 15' 12.56'' 14' 41.34'' 12' 13.40'' 15' 18.76" 15' 23.07" 08' 46.92'' 07' 21.16'' 06' 09.31'' 07' 07.03'' 11' 44.17'' 12' 28.69" 12' 24.63" 11' 08.75'' 07' 04.90" 08' 00.12" 13' 29. 89" 14' 01. 63" Lat 34ºN (f) 35'41.18" 38' 11.45'' 38' 11.10'' 37' 52.87'' 36' 55.53'' 38' 53.55" 39' 15.68" 37' 15.74'' 37' 46.57'' 38' 23.23'' 38' 35.24" 37' 03.47'' 38' 11.12" 38' 26.07" 37' 21.82'' 37' 48.88'' 37' 03.47'' 36' 45.54'' 38' 34.28" 38' 21.52" 38' 22.69'' 35' 13.96" 38' 03.00'' 39' 09.10" 38' 48.20'' 39' 21.13" 35' 30.26" 37' 46.62" 39' 22.38" 38' 11.04'' 38' 03.00'' Long 35ºE (i) 15' 55.2'' 06' 16.47' 15' 51.60'' 15' 15.38'' 14' 49.33'' 12' 35.77'' 15' 17.95" 15' 22.62" 14' 46.06" 08' 47.77'' 07' 23.04'' 06' 09.57'' 07' 06.99" 11' 53.12'' 12' 29.23" 12' 29.87" 11' 28.93'' 10' 56.93'' 11' 53.12'' 06' 30.56'' 06' 59.53" 07' 57.11" 07' 02.42'' 16' 30.48'' 13' 21.72" 13' 38.35'' 14' 10.35" 13' 33.32" 15' 39.78" 14' 09.17" 16' 30.48'' Lat 34ºN (i) Annex I. Stations of the 2016 mission in Lebanon Annex 15 0-7 0-7 0-8 0-7. 0-3. 0-15 5-45 9-42 4-43 0-13 0-15 9-14. 11-28 20-46 20-40 19-22 0-391 17-44 15-43 46-53 40-54 0-338 40-50 21-23 0-323 70-80 30-40 40-50 30 -43 13-21,5 Depth (m) (Y) Yassine, (Z) Ziad. Methods (Meth): (CTD) conductivity- temperature-depth probe, (Hy) hydroplane, (f) fish visual census, (ROV) remote operated vehicle, (Sc) scuba diving, (Sk) snorkeling. vehicle, (Sc) scuba diving, (Sk) snorkeling. (f)remote operated fish visual census, (ROV) (Hy) hydroplane, probe, conductivity- temperature-depth (Z) Ziad. Methods (Meth): (CTD) (Y) Yassine, Station code: (Ba) Batroun, (By) Byblos, (K) Kfar Abida, (M) Medfoun. Latitude (Lat), Longitude (Long); (i) initial, (f) final. Observers: (AF) Aitor, (AR) Alfonso, (C) Carlos, (G) Ghazi, (M) Milad, (O) Oscar, (AR) Alfonso, (C) (By) Byblos, (K) Kfar Abida, (M) Medfoun. Latitude (Lat), Longitude (Long); (i) initial, (f)Station code: (Ba) Batroun, final. Observers: (AF) Aitor, 30.09 30.09 30.09 30.09 30.09 30.09 01.10 30.09 01.10 01.10 01.10 01.10 01.10 02.10 02.10 02.10 03.10 02.10 03.10 03.10 03.10 03.10 04.10 04.10 04.10 04.10 04.10 05.10 05.10 05.10 05.10 Date 2016 Byblos Byblos Byblos Byblos Byblos Byblos Byblos Batroun Batroun Batroun Batroun Batroun Batroun Batroun Batroun Batroun Locality Medfoun Medfoun Medfoun Medfoun Medfoun Medfoun Medfoun Kfar Abida Kfar Abida Kfar Abida Kfar Abida Kfar Abida Batroun-Medfoun Byblos (Fartouch) Byblos, South port K-1 K-2 K-3 K-4 R-1 H-1 H-2 H-3 M-1 M-2 M-3 M-7 M-4 M-6 M-5 By-1 By-2 By-3 By-4 By-5 By-7 By-6 By-8 Ba-1 Ba-2 Ba-3 Ba-5 Ba-4 Ba-7 Ba-6.1 Ba-6.2 Station code

95 Annex II. Inventory of taxa recorded during the 2016 mission.

TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

CYANOBACTERIA Cyanobacteria spp. (spots) CC CHLOROPHYTA Bryopsis pennata J.V.Lamouroux, 1809 NIS-L C Bryopsis plumosa (Hudson) C.Agardh, 1823 R Caulerpa prolifera (Forsskål) J.V.Lamouroux, 1809 C Caulerpa lamourouxi (Turner) C.Agardh, 1817 C. racemosa var. lamourouxi, NIS-L CC Caulerpa scapelliformis (R.Brown ex Turner) C.Agardh, 1817 NIS-L CC Caulerpa taxifolia var. distichophylla (Sonder) Verlaque et al., 2013 NIS-L CC Cladophora pellucida (Hudson) Kützing, 1843 R Cladophoropsis sp. R Codium arabicum Kützing, 1856 NIS-L R Codium bursa (Olivi) C.Agardh, 1817 R Codium parvulum (Bory ex Audouin) P.C.Silva, 2003 NIS-L CC Codium taylori P.C.Silva, 1960 NIS-L C Flabellia petiolata (Turra) Nizamuddin, 1987 Udotea petiolata R Palmophyllum crassum (Naccari) Rabenhorst, 1868 R Ulva rigida C.Agardh, 1823 C OCHROPHYTA Cystoseira foeniculacea (Linnaeus) Greville, 1830 BaC (A-II), MRB R Dictyopteris polypodioides (A.P.De Candolle) J.V.Lamouroux, 1809 D. membranacea RR Dictyota implexa (Desfontaines) J.V.Lamouroux, 1809 D. dichotoma var. implexa R (J.V.Lamouroux) Womersley ex E.C.Oliveira, Lobophora variegata CC 1977 Padina boergesenii Allender & Kraft, 1983 NIS-L C Padina pavonica (Linnaeus) Thivy, 1960 R Sargassum vulgare C.Agardh, 1820 C Stypopodium schimperi (Buchinger) Verlaque & Boudouresque, 1991 NIS-L RR RHODOPHYTA Acanthophora nayadiformis (Delile) Papenfuss, 1968 NIS-L C Hypoglossum hypoglossoides (Stackhouse) F.S.Collins & Hervey, 1917 R Amphiroa beauvoisi Lamouroux (1816) R Amphiroa cryptarthrodia Zanardini, 1844 A. rubra CC Amphiroa rigida J.V.Lamouroux, 1816 CC Botryocladia botryoides (Wulfen) Feldmann, 1941 R Callithamnion granulatum (Ducluzeau) C.Agardh, 1828 CC Ceramiales spp. CC Ceramial sp. (violet) R Corallinales spp. CC (J.Ellis & Solander) K.R.Hind & G.W.Saunders, Ellisolandia elongata Corallina elongata CC 2013 Galaxaura rugosa (J.Ellis & Solander) J.V.Lamouroux, 1816 NIS-L C Gelidium spinosum (S.G.Gmelin) P.C.Silva, 1996 G. latifolium C Halymenia latifolia P. Crouan & H. Crouan ex Kützing 1866 R

96 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

Heterosiphonia crispella (C.Agardh) M.J.Wynne, 1985 H. wurdemannii C Hildenbrandia rubra (Sommerfelt) Meneghini, 1841 C Irvinea boergesenii (Feldmann) R.J.Wilkes, L.M.McIvor & Guiry, 2006 Botryocladia boergesenii R Jania rubens (Linnaeus) J.V.Lamouroux, 1816 CC Jania sp. C Laurencia obtusa (Hudson) J.V.Lamouroux, 1813 C Lithophyllum incrustans Philippi, 1837 CC Lithophyllum papillosum (Zanardini ex Hauck) Foslie 1900 C Lithophyllum stictaeforme (J.E. Areschoug) Hauck, 1877 CC Lithophyllum sp. CC Lithothamnion corallioides P.L.Crouan & H.M.Crouan, 1867 HD (A-V), MRB R Lithothamnion sp. R Lophocladia lallemandii (Montagne) F.Schmitz, 1893 NIS-L C Mesophyllum alternans (Foslie) Cabioch & Mendoza, 1998 C Mesophyllum sp. CC Neogoniolithon brassica-florida (Harvey) Setchell & L.R.Mason, 1943 N. notarisii C Neogoniolithon mamillosum (Hauck) Setchell & L.R.Mason, 1943 CC Palisada perforata (Bory de Saint-Vincent) K.W.Nam, 2007 Laurencia papillosa C Peyssonnelia rosa-marina Boudouresque & Denizot, 1973 CC Peyssonnelia rubra (Greville) J.Agardh, 1851 CC Peyssonnelia spp. CC Schottera nicaeensis (J.V. Lamouroux ex Duby) Guiry & Hollenberg, 1975 Petroglossum nicaeensis R Tricleocarpa gracilis (Linnaeus) Huisman & R.A.Townsend, 1993 Galaxaura oblongata C Womersleyella setacea (Hollenberg) R.E.Norris, 1992 NIS ? C Rhodoliths CC MAGNOLIOPHYTA Cymodocea nodosa (Ucria) Ascherson, 1870 RR FORAMINIFERA Amphistegina lobifera Larsen, 1976 NIS-L CC PORIFERA Calcarea Borojevia cf. cerebrum (Haeckel, 1872) Clathrina cerebrum CC Calcarea spp. CC (Vosmaeropsis,Syncetta) Clathrina coriacea (Montagu, 1814) R Clathrina sp. (pink) RR Paraleucilla magna Klautau, Monteiro & Borojevic, 2004 NIS-A R Sycon spp. CC Demospongiae Acanthella acuta Schmidt, 1862 RR Agelas oroides (Schmidt, 1864) C Aplysina aerophoba Nardo, 1833 Verongia aerophoba, BaC(A-II),BeC(A-II) CC Aplysina sp. BaC (A-II), BeC (A-II) R Aplysilla rosea ? (Barrois, 1876) RR

97 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

Aplysilla sulfurea Schulze, 1878 C Aplysilla sp. C Axinella brondstedi ? Bergquist, 1970 A. verrucosa RR Axinella damicornis (Esper, 1794) Cymbaxinella damicornis C Axinella polypoides Schmidt, 1862 BaC (A-II), BeC (A-II) C Axinella spp. CC Chondrilla nucula Schmidt, 1862 CC Chondrosia reniformis Nardo, 1847 CC Ciocalypta carballoi Vacelet et al. 2007 RR Cliona carteri (Ridley, 1881) R Cliona celata Grant, 1826 R Cliona parenzani Corriero & Scalera-Liaci, 1997 C Cliona viridis (Schmidt, 1862) C Corticium candelabrum Schmidt, 1862 R Crambe crambe (Schmidt, 1862) CC Cymbaxinella sp. R Demospongia sp.1 (blue) R Demospongia sp.2 R Demospongia sp.3 R Demospongia sp.4 R Diplastrella spp. CC Dysidea avara (Schmidt, 1862) R Haliclona fulva (Topsent, 1893) CC Haliclona sp. R Hexadella racovitzai Topsent, 1896 R Hippospongia communis (Lamarck, 1814) BaC (A-III), BeC (A-III) RR Ircinia oros (Schmidt, 1864) RR Ircinia cf. retidermata Pulitzer-Finali & Pronzato, 1981 R Ircinia sp. (yellow) CC Levantiniella levantinensis (Vacelet, Bitar, Carteron, Zibrowius & Pérez, 2007) Cinachyrella levantinensis C Mycale spp. CC Myrmekioderma spelaeum (Pulitzer-Finali, 1983) R Myxilla sp. ? R Niphates toxifera Vacelet et al, 2007 C Oscarella lobularis (Schmidt, 1862) R Petrosia ficiformis (Poiret, 1789) P. dura CC Phorbas fictitius ? (Bowerbank, 1866) Anchinoe fictitius R Phorbas tenacior (Topsent, 1925) Anchinoe tenacior C Phorbas topsenti Vacelet & Perez, 2008 part. P. tenacior CC Poecilloscleridae sp. C Raspaciona aculeata (Johnston, 1842) C Sarcotragus spinosulus Schmidt, 1862 C Spirastrella cunctatrix Schmidt, 1868 C

98 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

Spongia officinalis Linnaeus, 1759 Euspongia officinalis, BaC(A-III),BeC(AIII) C Spongia sp. R Terpiops sp. CC CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aglaophenia kirchenpaueri (Heller, 1868) C Aglaophenia picardi Svoboda, 1979 C Aglaophenia spp. C Eudendrium merulum Watson, 1985 C Eudendrium racemosum (Cavolini, 1785) C Eudendrium spp. CC Macrorhynchia philippina Kirchenpauer, 1872 Lytocarpus philippinus, NIS-L CC Pennaria disticha (Goldfuss, 1820) CC Sertularia marginata (Kirchenpauer, 1864) R Anthozoa Actinia equina (Linnaeus, 1758) R Bunodeopsis strumosa Andrès, 1881 C Caryophyllia cf. inornata (Duncan, 1878) RR Cladocora caespitosa (Linnaeus, 1767) CBa (A-II), WC (A-II) RR Madracis phaerensis (Heller, 1868) CC Oculina patagonica de Angelis, 1908 NIS-A C Phyllangia americana mouchezii (Lacaze-Duthiers, 1897) P. mouchezi, WC (A-II) C Polycyathus muellerae (Abel, 1959) C CTENOPHORA Mnemiopsis leidyi A. Agassiz, 1865 NIS-A R POLYCHAETA Errantia Hermodice carunculata (Pallas, 1766) CC Sedentaria Branchiomma bairdi (McIntosh, 1885) R Janua sp. 2 Protula intestinum (Lamarck, 1818) RR Sabella pavonina Savigny, 1822 R Sabella spallanzanii (Gmelin, 1791) Spirographis spallanzani RR Sabellidae spp. C Serpulidae spp. CC Spirobranchus lamarcki (Quatrefages, 1866) NIS-L R Spirorbis spp. C CRUSTACEA Cirripedia Balanus trigonus Darwin, 1854 NIS-L C Balanus spp. CC Chthamalus montagui Southward, 1976 CC

99 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

Chthamalus stellatus (Poli, 1795) CC Perphoratus perforatus (Bruguière, 1789) Balanus perforatus CC Isopoda Ligia italica Fabricius, 1798 CC Decapoda Atergatis roseus (Rüppell, 1830) NIS-L C Calcinus tubularis (Linnaeus, 1767) C. ornatus CC Charybdis hellerii (A. Milne-Edwards, 1867) NIS-L R Clibanarius erythropus (Latreille, 1818) C. misanthropus C Dardanus arrosor (Herbst, 1796) RR Diogenes pugilator (Roux, 1829) CC Eriphia verrucosa (Forskål, 1775) E. spinifrons C Gebiidea spp. R Halimede tyche (tests) (Herbst, 1801) NIS-L R Liocarcinus vernalis (Risso, 1827) Macropipus vernalis R Pachygrapsus marmoratus (Fabricius, 1787) C Pagurus anachoretus Risso, 1827 Eupagurus anachoretes C Percnon gibbesi (H. Milne Edwards, 1853) NIS-A R MOLLUSCA Gasrtropoda Prosobranchia Bittium spp. CC Cerithium scabridum Philippi, 1848 NIS-L CC Cerithium vulgatum (shells) Bruguière, 1792 RR Conomurex persicus (Swainson, 1821) NIS-L CC Cypaeidae sp. R Dendropoma anguliferum (Monterosato, 1878) BaC (A-II), BeC (A-II) C Echinolittorina punctata (Gmelin, 1791) Littorina punctata CC Ergalatax junionae Houart, 2008 E. obscura, NIS-L CC Haliotis tuberculata (shells) Linnaeus, 1758 H. lamellosa RR Mangelia sp. R Melarhaphe neritoides (Linnaeus, 1758) Littorina neritoides CC Nassarius circumcinctus (A. Adams, 1852) C Neverita josephinia (shells) Risso, 1826 R Phorcus turbinatus (Born, 1778) Osilinus turbinatus, Monodonta turbinata CC Patella caerulea Linnaeus, 1758 CC Patella rustica Linnaeus, 1758 P. lusitanica CC Patella ulyssiponensis Gmelin, 1791 CC Purpuradusta gracilis (Gaskoin, 1849) (shell) R Rhinoclavis kochi (Philippi, 1848) CC Tonna galea (shell) (Linnaeus, 1758) BaC (A-II), BeC (A-II) RR Tritia gibbosula (Linnaeus, 1758) Nassarius gibbosulus C Tritia mutabilis (Linnaeus, 1758) Nassarius mutabilis C Trochus erithreus Brocchi, 1821 Infundibulum erythraeum, NIS-L C

100 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

Thylacodes arenarius (Linnaeus, 1767) Serpulorbis arenarius, Vermetus gigas C Vermetus triquetrus Bivona-Bernardi, 1832 V. triqueter C Gastropoda Opisthobranchia Berthellina citrina (Rüppell & Leuckart, 1828) R Bulla striata (shells) Bruguière, 1792 R Caloria indica (Bergh, 1896) NIS-L R Elysia grandifolia Kelaart, 1858 NIS-L CC Goniobranchus annulatus (Eliot, 1904) NIS-L C Philineglossidae sp. ? R Spurilla cf. neapolitana (Delle Chiaje, 1841) R Bivalvia Acanthocardia tuberculata (shells) (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Anomia ephippium (shells) Linnaeus, 1758 C Arca noae (shells) Linnaeus, 1758 C Atlantella pulchella (shells) (Lamarck, 1818) Tellina pulchella C Brachidontes pharaonis (P. Fischer, 1870) NIS-L CC Chama pacifica Broderip, 1835 NIS-L CC Dendostrea frons (Linnaeus, 1758) NIS-L CC Donax semistriatus (shells) Poli, 1795 C Flexopecten glaber (Linnaeus, 1758) Chlamys glabra R Gafrarium savignyi (shells) (Jonas, 1846) NIS-L R Glycymeris bimaculata (Poli, 1795) C Glycymeris glycymeris (Linnaeus, 1758) C Glycymeris sp. CC Lioberus agglutinans (shells) (Cantraine, 1835) Amygdalum agglutinans C Lioberus sp. C Lithophaga lithophaga (Linnaeus, 1758) BaC (A-II), BeC (A-II) R Loripes orbiculatus (shells) Poli, 1791 C Mactra stultorum (shells) (Linnaeus, 1758) M. corallina C Malleus regulus (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775) Malvufundus regula, NIS-L CC Polititapes aureus (shells) (Gmelin, 1791) Paphia aurea, Venerupis aurea C Petricola lithophaga (Retzius, 1788) C Pinctada imbricata radiata (Leach, 1814) Pinctada radiata, NIS-L C Pitar rudis (shells) (Poli, 1795) C Spisula subtruncata (shells) (da Costa, 1778) C Spondylus groschi ? Lamprell & Kilburn, 1995 NIS-L R Spondylus spinosus Schreibers, 1793 NIS-L CC Striarca lactea (Linnaeus, 1758) Arca lactea C Venus verrucosa (shells) Linnaeus, 1758 R Venus sp. C Cephalopoda Loligidae sp. R

101 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

BRYOZOA Calpensia nobilis (Esper, 1796) R Cellepora sp. R Cradoscrupocellaria cf. reptans (Linnaeus, 1758) Scrupocellaria reptans C Crisia sp. C Entalophoroecia sp. C Frondipora verrucosa (Lamouroux, 1821) R Margaretta cereoides (Ellis & Solander, 1786) C Nolella sp. C Parasmittina spp. C Reptadeonella violacea (Johnston, 1847) C Schizoporella errata (Waters, 1878) CC Schizoretepora hassi Harmelin, Bitar & Zibrowius, 2007 C ECHINODERMATA Asteroidea Coscinasterias tenuispina (Lamarck, 1816) RR Echinoidea Brissus unicolor (tests) (Leske, 1778) C Echinocardium mediterraneum (tests) (Forbes, 1844) C Echinocyamus pusillus (tests) (O.F. Müller, 1776) C Holothuroida Holothuria sanctori Delle Chiaje, 1823 R Holothuria tubulosa Gmelin, 1791 C Synaptula reciprocans (Forskal, 1775) NIS-L CC Ophiuroidea Ophiocoma scolopendrina (Lamarck, 1816) NIS-L R Ophiothrix fragilis (Abildgaard in O.F. Müller, 1789) R CHORDATA Ascidiacea Botrylloides cf. leachii (Savigny, 1816) C Botrylloides sp. 1 C Botryllus sp. R Cystodytes dellechiajei (browm) (Della Valle, 1877) R Cystodytes dellechiajei (greenish) (Della Valle, 1877) C Cystodytes dellechiajei (violet) (Della Valle, 1877) CC Didemnidae sp.1 (orange) CC Didemnidae sp.2 (pink) C Didemnidae sp.3 (yellow) CC Didemnidae sp.4 (white) CC Didemnum coriaceum (Drasche, 1883) R Didemnum fulgens (Milne Edwards, 1841) C Herdmania momus (Savigny, 1816) Pyura momus, NIS-L CC Lissoclinum perforatum (Giard, 1872) L. pseudoleptoclinum R

102 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

Microcosmus exasperatus Heller, 1878 NIS-L CC Phallusia nigra Savigny, 1816 NIS-L CC Polyclinidae sp. R Pyura dura (Heller, 1877) C Rhodosoma turcicum (Savigny, 1816) part. R. verecundum, NIS-L R Stolidobranchia sp. (red) R Symplegma brakenhielmi (Michaelsen, 1904) NIS-L C PISCES Elasmobranchii Dasyatis pastinaca (Linnaeus, 1758) C Aetomylaeus bovinus (Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1817) Pteromylaeus bovinus RR Taeniura grabata (E. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1817) RR Actinopterygii Alepes sp. NIS-L C Apogon imberbis (Linnaeus, 1758) R Apogonichthyoides nigripinnis (Cuvier, 1828) Apogon nigripinnis, NIS-L R Atherinomorus lacunosus (Forster, 1801) CC Balistes capriscus Gmelin, 1789 B. carolinensis R Belone belone (Linnaeus, 1761) C Blenniidae sp. C Boops boops (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Caranx chrysos (Mitchill, 1815) CC Cheilodipterus novemstriatus (Rüppell, 1838) NIS-L CC Chomis chromis (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Coris julis (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Diplodus cervinus (Lowe, 1838) C Diplodus puntazzo (Walbaum, 1792) Puntazzo puntazzo RR Diplodus sargus (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Diplodus vulgaris (Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, 1817) CC Dussumieria elopsoides ? Bleeker, 1849 NIS-L C Echeneis naucrates Linnaeus, 1758 R Epinephelus costae (Steindachner, 1878) E. alexandrinus C Epinephelus marginatus (Lowe, 1834) E. guaza, BaC (A-III), BeC (A-III) C Fistularia commersonii Rüppell, 1835 NIS-L C Gobius bucchichii Steindachner, 1870 CC Gobius paganellus Linnaeus, 1758 RR Gymnothorax unicolor (Delaroche, 1809) R Lithognathus mormyrus (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Mugilidae spp. CC Mullus surmuletus Linnaeus, 1758 C Muraena helena Linnaeus, 1758 C Mycteroperca rubra (Bloch, 1793) C Oblada melanura (Linnaeus, 1758) CC

103 TAXA Authors Common synonymies, spp. interest RA

Pagrus auriga Valenciennes, 1843 Sparus auriga RR Parablennius zvonimiri (Kolombatovic, 1892) Blennius zvonimiri C Plotosus lineatus (Thunberg, 1787) NIS-L CC Pempheris vanicolensis Cuvier, 1831 NIS-L CC Pomadasys incisus (Bowdich, 1825) Pomadasis bennettii C Pteragogus pelycus Randall, 1981 NIS-L C Pteragogus trispilus Randall, 2013 NIS-L R Pterois miles (Bennett, 1828) NIS-L C Sargocentrum rubrum (Forsskål, 1775) NIS-L CC Scaridae sp. NIS-L RR Scorpaena maderensis Valenciennes, 1833 C Scorpaena porcus Linnaeus, 1758 R Seriola dumerili (Risso, 1810) R Serranus cabrilla (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Serranus scriba (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Siganus luridus (Rüppell, 1829) NIS-L CC Siganus rivulatus Forsskål, 1775 NIS-L CC Sparisoma cretense (Linnaeus, 1758) Scarus cretensis CC Spicara smaris (Linnaeus, 1758) C Stephanolepis diaspros Fraser-Brunner, 1940 NIS-L C Symphodus ocellatus (Linnaeus, 1758) Crenilabrus ocellatus RR Symphodus roissali (Risso, 1810) Crenilabrus quinquemaculatus R Symphodus tinca (Linnaeus, 1758) Crenilabrus tinca C Thalassoma pavo (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Torquigener flavimaculosus Hardy & Randall, 1983 NIS-L CC Tripterygion melanurum Guichenot, 1850 T. minor C Tripterygion tripteronotum (Risso, 1810) R Upeneus pori Ben-Tuvia & Golani, 1989 NIS-L R Xyrichtys novacula (Linnaeus, 1758) CC Reptilia Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758) R

104 Annex III. Taxa/station Annex III-1 : Batroun (stations, see Annex I).

Locality code (Batroun) Ba-1 Ba-2 Ba-3 Ba-4 Ba-5 Ba-6.1 Ba-6.2 Ba-7 Ba Nº Station 1 2 3 5 6 21 24 25 8 st. Depth (m) 11-28 20-46 20-40 19-22 0-15 40-50 40-50 30-40 0-50 CYANOBACTERIA Cyanobacteria spp. (spots) - - - 2 - - - - 2 CHLOROPHYTA Bryopsis plumosa - - - - 1 - - - 1 Caulerpa lamourouxi 3 3 3 1 1 - - - 11 Caulerpa scapelliformis 3 3 1 - - - - - 7 Caulerpa taxifolia var. distichophylla - - - - 1 - - - 1 Codium arabicum - - - - 2 - - - 2 Codium bursa - 2 ------2 Codium parvulum 3 - - 3 3 - - - 9 Flabellia petiolata - - - - - 1 - - 1 Palmophyllum crassum - - - - - 2 - - 2 OCHROPHYTA Cystoseira foeniculacea 2 - - 2 - - - - 4 Lobophora variegata - - - 1 2 - - 2 5 Padina boergesenii - - - - 2 - - - 2 RHODOPHYTA Hypoglossum hypoglossoides - - - - - 2 2 - 4 Amphiroa cryptarthrodia - - - 3 3 - - - 6 Amphiroa rigida - - - 3 3 - - - 6 Ellisolandia elongata - - - - 3 - - - 3 Galaxaura rugosa - - - - 1 - - - 1 Jania rubens - - - - 3 - - - 3 Lithophyllum incrustans - - - - 3 - - - 3 Lithophyllum stictaeforme - - - - 2 3 2 - 7 Lithophyllum sp. - - - 3 - - - - 3 Mesophyllum sp. - - - 3 - 3 3 - 9 Neogoniolithon mamillosum - - - 3 - 3 2 3 11 Peyssonnelia rosa-marina - - - - - 3 1 - 4 Peyssonnelia rubra - - - - 3 3 - 1 7 Peyssonnelia spp. - - - 2 3 - - - 5 Tricleocarpa gracilis - - - - 1 - - - 1 Womersleyella setacea - - - - - 3 3 - 6 Rhodoliths 2 ------1 3 FORAMINIFERA Amphistegina lobifera - - - 3 3 - - - 6 PORIFERA Calcarea Borojevia cf. cerebrum - - - - 3 - - - 3 Calcarea spp. (Vosmaeropsis, Syncetta) - - - - 3 - 3 - 6 Sycon spp. - - - 2 3 2 2 2 11

105 Locality code (Batroun) Ba-1 Ba-2 Ba-3 Ba-4 Ba-5 Ba-6.1 Ba-6.2 Ba-7 Ba Demospongiae Acanthella acuta - - - - - 1 - - 1 Agelas oroides - - - - - 1 2 - 3 Aplysina aerophoba 2 - - 2 2 - 1 3 10 Aplysilla sulfurea - - - - - 2 1 - 3 Aplysilla sp. ------3 3 Axinella damicornis - - - - - 2 2 - 4 Axinella polypoides - - - - - 3 3 - 6 Axinella spp. 1 - 2 1 - 3 - 2 9 Chondrilla nucula - - - 1 - - - - 1 Chondrosia reniformis - - - - 2 - 1 - 3 Ciocalypta carballoi 2 - - 1 - - - - 3 Cliona parenzani - - - - 2 - - - 2 Cliona viridis - - - - 2 - - - 2 Corticium candelabrum - - - - - 2 - - 2 Crambe crambe 3 - - 3 3 3 2 3 17 Demospongia sp. 2 ------1 - 1 Diplastrella spp. - - - - 1 2 2 - 5 Haliclona fulva - - - - 1 3 2 - 6 Hexadella racovitzai - - - - - 1 - - 1 Ircinia cf. retidermata - - - 1 - - - - 1 Ircinia sp. (yellow) 2 - - 2 - 1 - 1 6 Levantiniella levantinensis 1 - - 1 - - - - 2 Mycale spp. - - - - 2 1 2 - 5 Myrmekioderma spelaeum ------1 - 1 Niphates toxifera - 1 - 2 - 3 2 - 8 Oscarella lobularis - - - - - 1 - - 1 Petrosia ficiformis - - - 1 1 3 2 - 7 Phorbas fictitius ? - - - - - 2 - - 2 Phorbas tenacior - - - - - 2 - - 2 Phorbas topsenti - - - 3 2 2 1 3 11 Raspaciona aculeata - - - - - 2 - - 2 Sarcotragus spinosulus 1 - - 1 - - - - 2 Spirastrella cunctatrix - - - - 2 2 1 - 5 Spongia officinalis - - - - 1 - 2 - 3 Terpiops sp. - - - - 2 2 - - 1 CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Eudendrium spp. 2 - - 3 2 3 2 3 15 Macrorhynchia philippina - - - - 3 - - - 3 Pennaria disticha - - - - 3 - - 2 5 Anthozoa Madracis phaerensis - - - - 2 3 1 - 6 Phyllangia americana mouchezii - - - - - 3 - - 3 Polycyathus muellerae - - - - 1 1 - - 2

106 Locality code (Batroun) Ba-1 Ba-2 Ba-3 Ba-4 Ba-5 Ba-6.1 Ba-6.2 Ba-7 Ba POLYCHAETA Errantia Hermodice carunculata - - - - 3 2 2 3 10 Sedentaria Protula intestinum - - - - - 1 - - 1 Sabella pavonina - 3 ------3 Sabella spallanzanii ------1 - 1 Sabellidae spp. - - - 1 - - - - 1 Serpulidae spp. - - - - 3 3 3 - 9 CRUSTACEA Cirripedia Balanus spp. - - - 3 3 - - 2 8 Perphoratus perforatus - - - - 3 - - - 3 Decapoda Atergatis roseus - - - - 1 - - - 1 Calcinus tubularis - - - - 1 - - - 1 Dardanus arrosor ------1 - 1 Halimede tyche (test) - - - - 1 - - - 1 MOLLUSCA Gasrtropoda Prosobranchia Cerithium scabridum - - - - 3 - - - 3 Conomurex persicus - - - 1 2 - - - 3 Ergalatax junionae - - - - 2 - - - 2 Neverita josephinia (shells) - - - 1 - - - - 1 Rhinoclavis kochi - - - 1 - - - - 1 Serpuloides arenarius - - - - - 1 2 - 3 Gastropoda Opisthobranchia Elysia grandifolia - - - 1 2 - - - 3 Bivalvia Arca noae (shells) ------1 1 Chama pacifica 3 - - 3 3 1 1 2 13 Dendostrea frons 2 - - 2 2 - - - 6 Glycymeris bimaculata - - - 1 - - - - 1 Glycymeris glycymeris - - - 1 - - - - 1 Lioberus sp. - - - 1 - - - - 1 Lithophaga lithophaga (shells) - - - - 1 - - - 1 Malleus regulus - - - 3 3 3 - 2 11 Polititapes aureus (shell) - - - 1 - - - - 1 Pinctada imbricata radiata - - - 1 1 - - - 2 Spondylus groschi ? - - - - 1 1 - - 2 Spondylus spinosus 2 - - 1 3 2 - 2 10 Venus verrucosa (shells) - - - 1 - - - - 1 Cephalopoda Loligidae sp. - - - - 1 - - - 1

107 Locality code (Batroun) Ba-1 Ba-2 Ba-3 Ba-4 Ba-5 Ba-6.1 Ba-6.2 Ba-7 Ba BRYOZOA Crisia sp. - - - - 3 - - - 3 Entalophoroecia sp. - - - - 2 - - - 2 Nolella sp. - - - - 3 - - - 3 Schizoretepora hassi - - - - - 3 2 - 5 ECHINODERMATA Holothuroida Synaptula reciprocans 3 - 1 - - 1 - 1 6 CHORDATA Ascidiacea Cystodytes dellechiajei (violet) - - - - 2 - - - 2 Didemnidae sp.1 (orange) - - - - 3 - - - 3 Didemnidae sp.3 (yellow) - - - - 1 - - - 1 Didemnidae sp.4 (white) - - - 1 1 3 - 1 6 Didemnum fulgens - - - - - 2 - - 2 Herdmania momus - - - - 1 1 1 2 5 Phallusia nigra - - - 1 1 - - - 2 Symplegma brakenhielmi - - - - 1 - - - 1 PISCES Elasmobranchii Dasyatis pastinaca 1 1 - - - - 1 3 Actinopterygii Alepes sp. ------1 1 Apogon imberbis - - - - - 1 - - 1 Balistes capriscus 1 ------1 Cheilodipterus novemstriatus - - - 3 - 2 - 2 7 Chomis chromis - - 3 2 3 - 3 3 14 Coris julis - - 2 3 2 - 1 3 11 Diplodus cervinus - - - - 1 - 1 - 2 Diplodus sargus - - - 3 2 2 3 3 13 Diplodus vulgaris - - - 3 2 3 3 3 14 Epinephelus costae - - - 1 - - - - 1 Epinephelus marginatus - - - 1 - - - - 1 Fistularia commersonii - - - 1 - - - - 1 Gobius bucchichii - - - - 1 - - - 1 Lithognathus mormyrus - - - - 2 - - - 2 Mugilidae spp. - - - 2 2 - - - 4 Mycteroperca rubra - - - 1 1 - 1 - 3 Oblada melanura - - - - 3 - 3 2 8 Pagrus auriga ------1 - 1 Plotosus lineatus - - - 3 - - 3 - 6 Pempheris vanicolensis - - - 3 3 - - - 6 Pterois miles - - - - - 1 1 2 4 Sargocentrum rubrum - - 2 2 2 2 3 3 14 Scorpaena maderensis - - - - 1 1 - 1 3

108 Locality code (Batroun) Ba-1 Ba-2 Ba-3 Ba-4 Ba-5 Ba-6.1 Ba-6.2 Ba-7 Ba Serranus cabrilla 1 - - 1 1 - 1 2 6 Serranus scriba - - - 2 2 - - - 4 Siganus luridus - - 1 - - - 2 3 6 Siganus rivulatus 2 - - 3 3 - 2 3 13 Sparisoma cretense - - 1 - - - 1 3 5 Stephanolepis diaspros - - - 2 1 1 1 - 5 Symphodus tinca - - - - 1 - - - 1 Thalassoma pavo - - - - 3 - - 1 4 Torquigener flavimaculosus 3 3 3 3 2 1 - 3 18 Xyrichtys novacula - - 1 1 - - - - 2 Species richness (S) 22 7 11 63 88 58 52 38 155 Relative abundance (A) 45 16 20 118 178 117 93 83 667 Margalef Index (MI) 5,52 2,16 3,34 13 16,79 11,97 11,25 8,37 23,68

109 Annex III-2. Kfar Abida (stations, see Annex I)

Locality code (Kfar Abida) K-1 K-2 K-3 K-4 K Nº Station 24 25 30 31 4 st. Depth (m) 21-23 0-7 0-8 0-3 0-23 CYANOBACTERIA Cyanobacteria spp. (spots) - 3 - 3 6 CHLOROPHYTA Bryopsis pennata - - - 3 3 Cladophora pellucida - 1 - - 1 Cladophoropsis sp. - - - 2 2 Codium parvulum 3 3 3 3 12 Ulva rigida - - - 3 3 OCHROPHYTA Lobophora variegata 2 - 2 - 4 Padina boergesenii - - - 1 1 RHODOPHYTA Amphiroa cryptarthrodia 2 2 2 2 8 Amphiroa rigida 1 2 - 2 5 Callithamnion granulatum - - - 3 3 Ceramiales spp. 3 3 3 - 9 Ceramial sp. (violet) 2 - - - 2 Corallinales spp. 3 - 3 - 6 Ellisolandia elongata - 3 3 3 9 Galaxaura rugosa 2 2 3 1 8 Jania rubens - 1 - 3 4 Jania sp. 3 - - - 3 Laurencia obtusa - - - 2 2 Lithophyllum incrustans 3 3 3 3 12 Lithophyllum papillosum - - - 3 3 Lithophyllum stictaeforme - 2 2 3 7 Lithothamnion sp. - - 2 - 2 Lophocladia lallemandii - - 1 - 1 Mesophyllum sp. 3 2 2 - 7 Neogoniolithon brassica-florida - - - 2 2 Neogoniolithon mamillosum 2 - 2 - 4 Palisada perforata - - - 3 3 Peyssonnelia rubra - 2 3 3 8 Peyssonnelia spp. 3 3 3 - 9 Tricleocarpa gracilis - 1 - - 1 FORAMINIFERA Amphistegina lobifera 3 - - - 3 PORIFERA Calcarea Borojevia cf. cerebrum 1 2 3 - 6 Calcarea spp. (Vosmaeropsis, Syncetta) 2 3 3 3 11

110 Locality code (Kfar Abida) K-1 K-2 K-3 K-4 K

Locality code (Kfar Abida) K-1 K-2 K-3 K-4 K Clathrina coriacea - 1 2 - 3 Nº Station 24 25 30 31 4 st. Clathrina sp. (pink) - - 1 - 1 Depth (m) 21-23 0-7 0-8 0-3 0-23 Sycon spp. 2 3 3 - 8 CYANOBACTERIA Demospongiae Cyanobacteria spp. (spots) - 3 - 3 6 Aplysilla rosea ? - - 1 - 1 CHLOROPHYTA Aplysilla sulfurea - - 3 - 3 Bryopsis pennata - - - 3 3 Aplysilla sp. 2 - 2 - 4 Cladophora pellucida - 1 - - 1 Axinella brondstedi ? - - 1 - 1 Cladophoropsis sp. - - - 2 2 Axinella damicornis - - 1 - 1 Codium parvulum 3 3 3 3 12 Axinella spp. 2 1 2 - 5 Ulva rigida - - - 3 3 Chondrilla nucula - 3 3 2 8 OCHROPHYTA Chondrosia reniformis 1 3 3 2 9 Lobophora variegata 2 - 2 - 4 Cliona celata - - 2 - 2 Padina boergesenii - - - 1 1 Cliona viridis - 2 - - 2 RHODOPHYTA Crambe crambe 3 3 3 3 12 Amphiroa cryptarthrodia 2 2 2 2 8 Cymbaxinella sp. - - 2 - 2 Amphiroa rigida 1 2 - 2 5 Demospongia sp. 3 - - 1 - 1 Callithamnion granulatum - - - 3 3 Diplastrella spp. - 2 3 - 5 Ceramiales spp. 3 3 3 - 9 Haliclona fulva 2 2 - - 4 Ceramial sp. (violet) 2 - - - 2 Haliclona sp. - 2 - - 2 Corallinales spp. 3 - 3 - 6 Hexadella racovitzai - - 1 - 1 Ellisolandia elongata - 3 3 3 9 Ircinia sp. (yellow) - 1 2 - 3 Galaxaura rugosa 2 2 3 1 8 Levantiniella levantinensis - 1 1 - 2 Jania rubens - 1 - 3 4 Mycale spp. - - 3 2 5 Jania sp. 3 - - - 3 Myrmekioderma spelaeum - - 2 - 2 Laurencia obtusa - - - 2 2 Myxilla sp. ? - - 2 - 2 Lithophyllum incrustans 3 3 3 3 12 Petrosia ficiformis 3 - - - 3 Lithophyllum papillosum - - - 3 3 Phorbas tenacior - - 1 - 1 Lithophyllum stictaeforme - 2 2 3 7 Phorbas topsenti 2 2 - 1 5 Lithothamnion sp. - - 2 - 2 Raspaciona aculeata - 1 2 - 3 Lophocladia lallemandii - - 1 - 1 Sarcotragus spinosulus - 1 - - 1 Mesophyllum sp. 3 2 2 - 7 Spirastrella cunctatrix - - 1 - 1 Neogoniolithon brassica-florida - - - 2 2 Spongia officinalis - 2 1 - 3 Neogoniolithon mamillosum 2 - 2 - 4 Spongia sp. - - 1 - 1 Palisada perforata - - - 3 3 Terpiops sp. - 2 2 - 4 Peyssonnelia rubra - 2 3 3 8 CNIDARIA Peyssonnelia spp. 3 3 3 - 9 Hydrozoa Tricleocarpa gracilis - 1 - - 1 Aglaophenia picardi - - 3 - 3 FORAMINIFERA Eudendrium spp. 2 2 2 - 6 Amphistegina lobifera 3 - - - 3 Macrorhynchia philippina - 3 2 - 5 PORIFERA Pennaria disticha - 3 2 - 5 Calcarea Anthozoa Borojevia cf. cerebrum 1 2 3 - 6 Actinia equina - - - 1 1 Calcarea spp. (Vosmaeropsis, Syncetta) 2 3 3 3 11 Madracis phaerensis - - 2 - 2 Oculina patagonica - 1 1 2 4

111 Locality code (Kfar Abida) K-1 K-2 K-3 K-4 K Phyllangia americana mouchezii - - 1 - 1 Polycyathus muellerae - - 3 - 3 POLYCHAETA Errantia Hermodice carunculata - 2 3 2 7 Sedentaria Janua sp. - 2 - - 2 Serpulidae spp. 3 3 3 - 9 Spirobranchus lamarcki - 2 - - 2 CRUSTACEA Cirripedia Balanus spp. 3 3 3 3 12 Chthamalus montagui - - 3 3 6 Chthamalus stellatus - - 3 3 6 Isopoda Ligia italica - - - 3 3 Decapoda Atergatis roseus - 1 - 2 3 Calcinus tubularis - - - 2 2 Charybdis hellerii - 1 - - 1 Clibanarius erythropus - - - 3 3 Eriphia verrucosa - 1 - 2 3 Halimede tyche (tests) - 1 - - 1 Pachygrapsus marmoratus - - - 2 2 MOLLUSCA Gasrtropoda Prosobranchia Cerithium scabridum 1 - 3 - 4 Conomurex persicus - - 2 - 2 Dendropoma anguliferum - - - 1 1 Echinolittorina punctata - - - 3 3 Ergalatax junionae 1 2 2 2 7 Melarhaphe neritoides - - - 3 3 Phorcus turbinatus - - - 3 3 Patella caerulea - - - 1 1 Patella rustica - - - 2 2 Patella ulyssiponensis - - - 3 3 Vermetus triquetrus - 2 - - 2 Gastropoda Opisthobranchia Elysia grandifolia - 1 - 3 4 Bivalvia Brachidontes pharaonis - - - 2 2 Chama pacifica 3 2 2 2 9 Dendostrea frons 2 2 - - 4 Flexopecten glaber - - 1 - 1 Lioberus sp. - - 2 - 2

112 Locality code (Kfar Abida) K-1 K-2 K-3 K-4 K Malleus regulus 2 - 2 - 4 Spondylus spinosus 3 2 2 2 9 BRYOZOA Cellepora sp. - - 2 - 2 Margaretta cereoides - 1 2 - 3 Parasmittina spp. - - 2 - 2 Reptadeonella violacea 1 - - - 1 Schizoporella errata - 2 - - 2 Schizoretepora hassi - - 2 - 2 ECHINODERMATA Holothuroida Holothuria tubulosa - - 1 - 1 Ophiuroidea Ophiocoma scolopendrina 1 - - - 1 CHORDATA Ascidiacea Botrylloides cf. leachii - 1 - - 1 Botrylloides sp. 1 - 1 - - 1 Cystodytes dellechiajei (violet) - 2 3 2 7 Didemnidae sp.1 (orange) 3 3 2 - 8 Didemnidae sp.3 (yellow) - - 1 1 2 Didemnidae sp.4 (white) 3 3 3 - 9 Didemnum coriaceum - - 2 - 2 Herdmania momus 1 2 1 - 4 Lissoclinum perforatum - - 2 - 2 Phallusia nigra - 2 2 - 4 Rhodosoma turcicum - 1 - - 1 PISCES Actinopterygii Alepes sp. - - - 1 1 Apogon imberbis - - 1 - 1 Atherinomorus lacunosus - 3 3 - 6 Boops boops - - 3 - 3 Caranx chrysos - - 3 3 6 Cheilodipterus novemstriatus 3 - - - 3 Chomis chromis 1 3 2 - 6 Coris julis 2 1 2 2 7 Diplodus cervinus - 1 1 - 2 Diplodus sargus - 2 3 - 5 Diplodus vulgaris 1 2 2 - 5 Dussumieria elopsoides ? - 3 - - 3 Epinephelus marginatus - 1 - - 1 Fistularia commersonii - - - 1 1 Gymnothorax unicolor - 1 - - 1 Lithognathus mormyrus - - - 2 2

113 Locality code (Kfar Abida) K-1 K-2 K-3 K-4 K Mugilidae spp. - 3 2 - 5 Muraena helena - - 1 1 2 Mycteroperca rubra - - - 2 2 Oblada melanura - - 2 2 4 Pempheris vanicolensis - 3 3 3 9 Pteragogus pelycus 1 - - - 1 Sargocentrum rubrum 2 3 1 2 8 Scaridae sp. - - 1 - 1 Scorpaena maderensis - - 1 1 2 Scorpaena porcus - 1 1 - 2 Serranus scriba 1 2 1 1 5 Siganus luridus - 2 2 2 6 Siganus rivulatus - 2 3 3 8 Sparisoma cretense - 1 1 3 5 Stephanolepis diaspros - 1 1 - 2 Symphodus tinca - 1 1 - 2 Thalassoma pavo 3 3 3 3 12 Torquigener flavimaculosus 3 - - - 3 Tripterygion melanurum - 1 - - 1 Reptilia Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758) - - 1 - 1 Species richness (S) 47 84 104 67 166 Relative abundance (RA) 101 164 212 149 628 Margalef Index (M) 9,97 16,27 19,23 13,15 25,61

114 Annex III-3. Medfoun (stations, see Annex I)

Locality code (Medfoun) M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 M-6 M-7 M Nº Station 4 11 13 14 15 16 17 7 st. Depth (m) 30-43 37-44 15-43 46-53 9-14. 13-22 0-13 0-53 CYANOBACTERIA Cyanobacteria spp. (spots) - - - - - 3 - 3 CHLOROPHYTA Caulerpa lamourouxi - - - - 3 - - 3 Caulerpa taxifolia var. distichophylla 1 - - - - 1 - 2 Cladophora pellucida - - - - 1 - - 1 Codium arabicum - - - - 1 - - 1 Codium bursa - - - 2 - - - 2 Codium parvulum - - - - 3 3 3 9 Codium taylori ------2 2 Flabellia petiolata - - - 2 - - - 2 OCHROPHYTA Dictyota implexa - - - - - 2 - 2 Lobophora variegata 1 - - - 1 - 1 3 RHODOPHYTA Acanthophora nayadiformis ------3 3 Amphiroa beauvoisi ------3 3 Amphiroa cryptarthrodia - - - 3 3 - - 6 Amphiroa rigida - - - - 3 - 3 6 Botryocladia botryoides - - - 2 - - - 2 Ceramiales spp. - - - - - 3 - 3 Ellisolandia elongata ------3 3 Galaxaura rugosa ------1 1 Gelidium spinosum - - - - 3 - - 3 Heterosiphonia crispella ------2 2 Hildenbrandia rubra ------3 3 Irvinea boergesenii - - - 2 - - - 2 Jania rubens (Linnaeus) ------3 3 Lithophyllum incrustans ------3 3 Lithophyllum papillosum ------Lithophyllum stictaeforme ------2 2 Lithophyllum sp. - - - - 2 - - 2 Lithothamnion corallioides - - - 2 - - - 2 Mesophyllum alternans - - - 3 - - - 3 Mesophyllum sp. - - - 3 3 3 2 11 Neogoniolithon mamillosum - - - 2 3 3 3 11 Palisada perforata ------2 2 Peyssonnelia rosa-marina - - - 2 - - 2 4 Peyssonnelia rubra - - - 3 - - - 3 Peyssonnelia spp. - - - - 3 - 3 6 Schottera nicaeensis ------2 2

115 Locality code (Medfoun) M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 M-6 M-7 M Tricleocarpa gracilis - - - - - 1 2 3 Rhodoliths - 3 - 3 - - - 6 FORAMINIFERA Amphistegina lobifera - - - - 3 - - 3 PORIFERA Calcarea Borojevia cf. cerebrum - - - - 1 - 3 4 Calcarea spp. (Vosmaeropsis, Syncetta) - - - - 3 - 3 6 Sycon spp. - - - 1 3 - 2 6 Demospongiae Agelas oroides - - - 2 - - - 2 Aplysina sp. ------3 3 Aplysilla sulfurea ------3 3 Aplysilla sp. ------3 3 Axinella damicornis - - - 2 - - - 2 Axinella polypoides - - - 2 - - - 2 Axinella spp. - - 1 - 2 - - 3 Chondrilla nucula ------2 2 Chondrosia reniformis ------3 3 Cliona parenzani ------2 2 Crambe crambe - - - 3 3 3 3 12 Demospongia sp.1 ------2 2 Haliclona fulva - - - 1 1 - 1 3 Ircinia sp. (yellow) - - - 1 - - - 1 Levantiniella levantinensis ------1 1 Mycale spp. ------1 1 Phorbas fictitius ? - - - 1 - - - 1 Phorbas topsenti - - - 1 - - 1 2 Sarcotragus spinosulus ------2 2 Spongia officinalis ------1 1 Spongia sp. ------1 1 Terpiops sp. - - - - 2 - 2 4 CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aglaophenia kirchenpaueri - - - 3 - - - 3 Aglaophenia spp. - - - 2 - - - 2 Eudendrium merulum - - - 3 - - - 3 Eudendrium spp. - - - 2 3 3 2 10 Macrorhynchia philippina - - - - - 1 2 3 Pennaria disticha - - - - 2 2 3 7 Anthozoa Caryophyllia cf. inornata - - - - 1 - - 1 Cladocora caespitosa ------1 1 Madracis phaerensis - - - 3 - - - 3 Oculina patagonica ------1 1 Phyllangia americana mouchezii - - - 2 - - - 2 Polycyathus muellerae - - - - 2 - - 2

116 Locality code (Medfoun) M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 M-6 M-7 M POLYCHAETA Errantia Hermodice carunculata 1 - - - 2 - 2 5 CRUSTACEA Cirripedia Balanus spp. - - - 3 3 2 3 11 Decapoda Calcinus tubularis - - - - 3 - - 3 Eriphia verrucosa ------1 1 Pagurus anachoretus - - - - 2 - - 2 Percnon gibbesi ------1 1 MOLLUSCA Gasrtropoda Prosobranchia Bittium spp. - - - 3 - - - 3 Cerithium scabridum - - - - - 3 - 3 Cerithium vulgatum (shells) - - - - - 1 - 1 Conomurex persicus - - - - 1 2 2 5 Ergalatax junionae - - - - 2 - 2 4 Haliotis tuberculata (shell) - - - - - 1 - 1 Mangelia sp. - - - - - 1 - 1 Neverita josephinia (shells) - - - - - 1 - 1 Purpuradusta gracilis (shell) - - - - 1 - - 1 Rhinoclavis kochi - - - - - 3 - 3 Tonna galea (shell) - - - - - 1 - 1 Gastropoda Opisthobranchia Bulla striata (shells) - - - - 1 - - 1 Goniobranchus annulatus - - - - 1 - - 1 Bivalvia Chama pacifica - - - 1 3 1 3 8 Dendostrea frons - - - - 1 - - 1 Glycymeris glycymeris - - - - - 1 - 1 Lioberus agglutinans (shells) - - - - - 2 - 2 Loripes orbiculatus (shells) - - - - - 1 - 1 Malleus regulus - - - 1 3 - - 4 Polititapes aureus (shell) - - - - - 2 - 2 Pinctada imbricata radiata - - - - - 1 1 Pitar rudis (shells) - - - - - 2 - 2 Spondylus spinosus - - - 1 2 1 2 6 Striarca lactea (shells) - - - - - 1 - 1 Venus sp. ------1 1 BRYOZOA Cradoscrupocellaria cf. reptans - - - 2 1 - - 3 Entalophoroecia sp. - - - - 2 - 1 3 ECHINODERMATA Asteroidea Coscinasterias tenuispina - - - 1 - - - 1

117 Locality code (Medfoun) M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 M-6 M-7 M Echinoidea Brissus unicolor (test) - - - - - 1 - 1 Echinocyamus pusillus (tests) - - - 1 - - - 1 Holothuroida Holothuria sanctori ------2 2 Ophiuroidea Ophiothrix fragilis - - - 2 - - - 2 CHORDATA Ascidiacea Cystodytes dellechiajei (violet) - - - 2 - - 1 3 Didemnidae sp.1 (orange) - - - - 1 - 2 3 Didemnidae sp.2 (pink) - - - 2 - - 2 4 Didemnidae sp.3 (yellow) - - - - 3 - - 3 Didemnidae sp.4 (white) - - - 2 2 - 2 6 Didemnum fulgens - - - 3 - - - 3 Herdmania momus - - - 1 2 - 1 4 Phallusia nigra ------1 1 Polyclinidae sp. - - - 1 - - - 1 Stolidobranchia sp. (red) ------1 1 PISCES Elasmobranchii Dasyatis pastinaca - - 1 - - - - 1 Taeniura grabata - - 1 - - - - 1 Actinopterygii Alepes sp. - - - 1 - - - 1 Apogon imberbis - - - 1 - - 1 2 Belone belone ------3 3 Caranx chrysos ------2 2 Cheilodipterus novemstriatus - - 2 - - 3 - 5 Chomis chromis - 2 3 - 3 - 3 11 Coris julis - 2 - 2 2 2 2 10 Diplodus cervinus ------2 2 Diplodus sargus - 1 - - 1 3 3 8 Diplodus vulgaris - - 2 - 1 3 3 9 Epinephelus costae - - - - - 1 1 2 Epinephelus marginatus ------1 1 Gobius bucchichii - - - - 2 - 1 3 Gobius paganellus ------2 2 Lithognathus mormyrus ------2 2 Mugilidae spp. ------2 2 Mullus surmuletus ------2 2 Mycteroperca rubra ------1 1 Oblada melanura - - - - - 3 3 6 Pempheris vanicolensis - - - - 3 2 3 8 Pomadasys incisus ------2 2 Pteragogus pelycus - - - - - 1 - 1

118 Locality code (Medfoun) M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 M-6 M-7 M Sargocentrum rubrum - 2 - - 2 3 3 10 Scorpaena maderensis ------1 1 Seriola dumerili - - - 1 - - - 1 Serranus cabrilla - 1 - 1 1 2 1 6 Serranus scriba - - - - 1 3 1 5 Siganus luridus - - 1 2 - - 3 6 Siganus rivulatus - 2 - - 3 3 3 11 Sparisoma cretense - - 1 1 - 1 2 5 Spicara smaris - - - - - 3 - 3 Stephanolepis diaspros - - - - - 1 1 2 Symphodus roissali ------1 1 Symphodus tinca - - - - - 1 - 1 Thalassoma pavo - - - - 2 3 3 8 Torquigener flavimaculosus - 3 3 2 - 3 3 14 Tripterygion melanurum - - - - 3 - 1 4 Upeneus pori ------1 1 Xyrichtys novacula - - - - - 3 - 3 Species richness (S) 3 8 9 50 55 49 95 165 Relative abundance (A) 3 16 15 95 115 99 190 533 Margalef Index (M) 1,82 1,82 2,95 10,76 11,38 10,45 17,91 26,12

119 Annex III-4. Byblos (stations, see annex I)

Locality code (Byblos) By-1 By-2 By-3 By-4 By-5 By-6 By-7 By-8 By Station 7 8 9 11 17 18 19 20 8 st. Depth (m) 5-45 9-42 4-43 0-7 40-54 15 0-15 0-7m 0-54 CYANOBACTERIA Cyanobacteria spp. (spots) - - - - - 3 3 3 9 CHLOROPHYTA Caulerpa prolifera - 2 2 - - 2 - - 6 Caulerpa taxifolia var. distichophylla - 1 2 1 - 2 2 - 8 Cladophoropsis sp. ------1 - 1 Codium bursa - - - - 1 - - - 1 Codium parvulum - - - - 1 - 2 2 5 Codium taylori ------2 2 4 Palmophyllum crassum - - - - 1 - - - 1 OCHROPHYTA Dictyopteris polypodioides - - - 1 - - - - 1 Lobophora variegata - - - 2 - - 3 1 6 Padina boergesenii - - - 1 - - - - 1 Padina pavonica - - - 1 - - - - 1 Sargassum vulgare - - - 3 - - - - 3 Stypopodium schimperi - - - - 1 - - - 1 RHODOPHYTA Acanthophora nayadiformis - - - 2 - - - - 2 Amphiroa cryptarthrodia - - - - 2 - - 3 5 Amphiroa rigida ------3 2 5 Ceramiales spp. - - - - 3 - 3 - 6 Corallinales spp. ------3 - 3 Ellisolandia elongata - - - 3 - - 3 3 9 Galaxaura rugosa ------1 3 4 Halymenia latifolia - - - - 1 - - - 1 Jania rubens - - - 3 - - 3 3 9 Lithophyllum incrustans ------3 3 6 Lithophyllum stictaeforme - - - - 2 - - - 2 Lophocladia lallemandii ------3 3 Mesophyllum sp. - - - - 3 - - 2 5 Neogoniolithon mamillosum - - - - 3 - - - 3 Palisada perforata - - - 2 - - - - 2 Peyssonnelia rosa-marina - - - - 2 - - - 2 Peyssonnelia rubra - - - 2 2 - 2 2 8 Peyssonnelia spp. - - - 2 3 - - - 5 Rhodoliths - - - - 1 - - - 1 MAGNOLIOPHYTA Cymodocea nodosa - - 1 - - - - - 1 FORAMINIFERA Amphistegina lobifera - - - - 3 - 3 3 9

120 Locality code (Byblos) By-1 By-2 By-3 By-4 By-5 By-6 By-7 By-8 By PORIFERA Calcarea Borojevia cf. cerebrum - - - 2 - - 2 - 4 Calcarea spp. (Vosmaeropsis, Syncetta) ------2 - 2 Paraleucilla magna - - - 3 - - - - 3 Sycon spp. ------2 2 4 Demospongiae Agelas oroides - - - - 2 - - - 2 Aplysina aerophoba - - - 2 - - - - 2 Aplysilla sulfurea - - - 1 - - 1 1 3 Aplysilla sp. ------2 2 4 Axinella damicornis - - - - 2 - - - 2 Axinella polypoides - - - - 2 - - - 2 Axinella spp. 1 - - - 2 - - - 3 Chondrilla nucula ------2 2 Chondrosia reniformis - - - 3 - - 2 2 7 Cliona carteri - - - 1 - - - - 1 Crambe crambe 3 - - 3 3 - 3 3 15 Demospongia sp. 4 - - - 1 - - - - 1 Diplastrella spp. ------1 - 1 Dysidea avara - - - - 3 - - - 3 Haliclona fulva ------2 2 4 Haliclona sp. ------1 - 1 Hippospongia communis - - - - 1 - - - 1 Ircinia oros - - - - 1 - - - 1 Ircinia cf. retidermata - - - 1 - - - - 1 Ircinia sp. (yellow) - - - 2 - - - - 2 Levantiniella levantinensis ------1 1 Niphates toxifera - 1 ------1 Oscarella lobularis ------1 - 1 Phorbas tenacior - - - - 2 - - - 2 Phorbas topsenti - - - 2 - - - 1 3 Poecilloscleridae sp. - - - 3 - - 3 1 7 Sarcotragus spinosulus - - - - 1 - 1 2 4 Spirastrella cunctatrix - - - - 1 - - - 1 Spongia officinalis - - - 2 - - - 1 3 Terpiops sp. ------1 - 1 CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aglaophenia spp. - - - - 2 - - - 2 Eudendrium racemosum - - - - - 3 - - 3 Eudendrium spp. 2 - - 1 3 - 2 2 10 Macrorhynchia philippina - - - 3 - - 2 3 8 Pennaria disticha - - - 3 - 3 3 3 12 Sertularia marginata - - - 2 - - - - 2

121 Locality code (Byblos) By-1 By-2 By-3 By-4 By-5 By-6 By-7 By-8 By Anthozoa Bunodeopsis strumosa - 2 - - - 3 2 - 7 Madracis phaerensis - - - - 2 - - - 2 Oculina patagonica - - - 2 - - - 2 4 CTENOPHORA Mnemiopsis leidyi - - - - - 1 - - 1 POLYCHAETA Errantia Hermodice carunculata 1 - - 2 1 - 3 1 8 Sedentaria Branchiomma bairdi ------1 - 1 Sabellidae spp. ------3 - 3 Serpulidae spp. - - - 3 - - 3 - 6 Spirobranchus lamarcki ------2 - 2 Spirorbis spp. ------3 - 3 CRUSTACEA Cirripedia Balanus trigonus ------2 - 2 Balanus spp. - - - 3 - - - 3 6 Perphoratus perforatus ------3 3 6 Decapoda Atergatis roseus - - - 1 - - - - 1 Calcinus tubularis ------1 1 Diogenes pugilator - - - 3 - - 3 - 6 Eriphia verrucosa ------1 1 Gebiidea spp. ------2 - 2 Liocarcinus vernalis - - 1 - - - - - 1 MOLLUSCA Gasrtropoda Prosobranchia Cerithium scabridum ------3 3 6 Conomurex persicus - - - 1 - - 3 1 5 Cypaeidae sp. ------1 1 Ergalatax junionae - - - 3 - - 2 2 7 Nassarius circumcinctus - - - 3 - - 1 - 4 Nassarius gibbosulus ------2 - 2 Rhinoclavis kochi ------3 - 3 Serpuloides arenarius - - - 1 - - - - 1 Tritia mutabilis - - - 2 - - 2 - 4 Trochus erithreus ------1 3 4 Gastropoda Opisthobranchia Berthellina cf. edwardsii ------1 - 1 Caloria indica - - - - - 1 - - 1 Elysia grandifolia ------2 2 Goniobranchus annulatus ------1 - 1 Philineglossidae sp. ? ------1 - 1 Spurilla cf. neapolitana - - - - - 1 - - 1

122 Locality code (Byblos) By-1 By-2 By-3 By-4 By-5 By-6 By-7 By-8 By Bivalvia Acanthocardia tuberculata (shells) - - 3 1 - - 3 - 7 Anomia ephippium (shells) ------2 - 2 Arca noae (shells) ------1 1 Atlantella pulchella (shells) ------2 - 2 Brachidontes pharaonis ------3 - 3 Chama pacifica 3 - - 3 - - 3 2 11 Dendostrea frons - - - 3 - - 3 2 8 Donax semistriatus (shells) - - - 1 - - 2 - 3 Gafrarium savignyi (Jonas, 1846) (shell) ------1 1 Glycymeris sp. - - - 1 - - - - 1 Lithophaga lithophaga (shells) - - - 1 - - - - 1 Mactra stultorum - - - 1 - - - - 1 Malleus regulus - - - 3 - - 2 2 7 Petricola lithophaga ------1 - 1 Pinctada imbricata radiata - - - 2 - - - 2 4 Spisula subtruncata (shells) - - 3 - - - - - 3 Spondylus groschi ? ------1 - 1 Spondylus spinosus - - - 3 - - 2 1 6 Venus verrucosa (shells) - - - 1 - - - 1 2 BRYOZOA Calpensia nobilis ------1 1 2 Cradoscrupocellaria cf. reptans ------3 - 3 Parasmittina spp. ------2 - 2 Reptadeonella violacea ------1 - 1 Schizoporella errata - - - 3 - - 2 2 7 ECHINODERMATA Echinoidea Echinocardium mediterraneum - - 1 - - - - - 1 Echinocyamus pusillus - - - - 1 - - - 1 Holothuroida Synaptula reciprocans 1 - - - - 1 - - 2 CHORDATA Ascidiacea Botrylloides cf. leachii ------1 1 2 Botrylloides sp. 1 ------3 - 3 Botryllus sp. ------1 - 1 Cystodytes dellechiajei - - - 3 - - 2 3 8 Didemnidae sp.4 (white) - - - 2 - - 2 3 7 Didemnum coriaceum ------1 - 1 Herdmania momus - - - 1 - - 2 - 3 Microcosmus exasperatus - - 2 2 - 2 - - 6 Phallusia nigra - - - 3 - - 3 3 9 Pyura dura - - - 1 - - - 1 2 Rhodosoma turcicum ------1 - 1 Stolidobranchia sp. (red) - - - 3 - - - - 3 Symplegma brakenhielmi - - - 2 - - - - 2

123 Locality code (Byblos) By-1 By-2 By-3 By-4 By-5 By-6 By-7 By-8 By PISCES Elasmobranchii Dasyatis pastinaca 1 1 ------2 Aetomylaeus bovinus 1 ------1 Actinopterygii Alepes sp. ------2 - 2 Apogon imberbis - - - 1 - - - - 1 Apogonichthyoides nigripinnis - - - - - 1 - - 1 Blenniidae sp. ------1 1 2 Boops boops ------3 - 3 Caranx chrysos ------2 - 2 Cheilodipterus novemstriatus ------2 1 3 Chomis chromis 2 - - 3 - - - 3 8 Coris julis 2 - - 2 - - 2 2 8 Diplodus cervinus ------2 2 4 Diplodus puntazzo - - - 1 - - - - 1 Diplodus sargus 1 - - 2 - - 2 2 7 Diplodus vulgaris 2 - - 2 - - 2 2 8 Echeneis naucrates 1 ------1 Gobius bucchichii ------2 2 Lithognathus mormyrus ------2 - 2 Mugilidae spp. ------3 - 3 Muraena helena ------1 1 Mycteroperca rubra - - - 1 - - 1 - 2 Oblada melanura - - - 3 - - 3 - 6 Parablennius zvonimiri ------1 1 2 Pempheris vanicolensis - - - 2 - - 1 - 3 Pomadasys incisus ------2 - 2 Sargocentrum rubrum 2 - - 2 - - 1 1 6 Scorpaena maderensis - - - 1 - - 2 1 4 Scorpaena porcus ------1 1 Seriola dumerili ------1 1 2 Serranus cabrilla 1 1 - - 2 - - - 4 Serranus scriba - - - 1 - - - - 1 Siganus luridus - - - 2 - - 3 3 8 Siganus rivulatus - - - 3 - - 3 3 9 Stephanolepis diaspros ------1 1 Symphodus tinca (Linnaeus, 1758) - - - 2 - - - - 2 Thalassoma pavo 3 - - 3 - - 3 3 12 Torquigener flavimaculosus 2 - - 1 1 - - - 4 Tripterygion melanurum ------1 - 1 Tripterygion tripteronotum ------1 1 Xyrichtys novacula - - 2 2 - 2 2 - 8 Reptilia Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758) - - 1 - - - - - 1 Species richness (S) 17 6 10 78 33 13 103 66 191 Relative abundance (RA) 29 8 18 156 61 25 211 144 653 Margalef Index (M) 4,72 2,4 3,06 15,25 7,78 3,73 19,06 13,08 29,31

124 The Mediterranean Biodiversity Centre

Specially Protected Areas Regional Activity Centre (SPA/RAC) Boulevard du Leader Yasser Arafat - B.P. 337 - 1080 Tunis Cedex - Tunisia Tel: +216 71 206 649 / 485 | [email protected] | www.spa-rac.org